LivestockDigest

LivestockJULY 15, 2012 • www. aaalivestock . com Volume 54 • No. 7

“The greatest homage we can pay to truth is to use it.”

– JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL

NEWSPAPER

PRIO

RIT

Y H

AN

DLI

NG

b y L E E P I T T S

MARKET

DigestRiding Herd

by Lee Pitts

For 30 years The UnitedStates and the EuropeanUnion (EU) have beenfighting a costly war with

heavy casualties on both sides.Their long-standing battle is notover territory, religion, capitalismor socialism. No, their beef isover beef. Hormone treated beefto be more precise. The tradewar has inflicted injury to numer-ous innocent bystanders on bothsides of the Atlantic, such as pro-ducers of onions, carrots, mus-tard, glue, Roquefort dressingand American beef. After threedecades of fighting both sideswaved the white flag and haveagreed to a fragile peace. Sort of.

Who Started It?Ask most Americans what

started this trade war and they’llsay it’s just protectionism, thatthe EU is using hormones as anon-tariff trade barrier. That maywell be true, after all, in the late1980s when our beef was firstbanned, there were huge stock-piles of beef in EU countries andpolicy makers there were tryingto help struggling EU grazers bylimiting imports. But it reallywasn’t cattle producers who wereleaning on their elected officialsto impose the ban . . . it was EUconsumers who had serious con-cerns over the safety of all food.Besides, Europeans have always

diethylstilbestrol (DES) in theraising of French veal calves, fol-lowed by reports of hormonalirregularities in Italian childrenthey believe were caused by thefeeding of meat in school lunch-es that had been illegally pro-duced using hormones. Althoughthey never proved it, EU scien-tists said that was just becauseno samples of the suspect meat

existed for testing. American sci-entists simply said there was noscientific link. The issue flaredup again when a synthetic hor-mone showed up in veal basedbaby food.In the 1990s the issue had no

chance of getting resolvedbecause you had mad cows rav-aging the continent, killing con-sumers and financially destroyingproducers. In the EU at the timethere was little trust of scientists,academics and politicians as faras cows were concerned, andthey weren’t about to start talk-ing about hormones when thevoters were so deeply concernedabout the safety of their meatsupply.Then there was the issue of

the bringing together of all thecountries in the first place toform the Economic Union.(Many countries are rethinking

been highly suspicious of Ameri-can farming practices, fromgenetically modified organismsto our intensive factory farms.This was just not the way thingswere done in Europe.To get to the bottom of the

issue you must understand howthe Europeans were thinking inthe 1970s and 80s. There was abig furor over the illegal use of

One Tough Customer“Most folks are like

a bob-wire fence. They have their

good points.”

continued on page five

www.LeePittsbooks.com

Say “Cheese”

Many people gotupset over thereport that theEPA is using

drones to spy on feedlots inNebraska and Iowa, but itwasn’t true. It was just arumor. The EPA vehement-ly denied it and said, no,they are not using drones tospy on feedlots; they areusing airplanes to spy onfeedlots. Doesn’t that makeyou feel better? The EPAsays they were just trying toprotect people and I know Icertainly feel safer knowingthat our tax dollars arebeing used to spy on steersin North Platte.The EPA has the same

means of aerial reconnais-sance available as our mili-tary: drones, airplanes andsatellites. But while our mil-itary uses them to spy onterrorists in Afghanistan, theEPA is looking for them infeedlots. But I don’t know ofa single steer who has everhighjacked an airplane, setoff an explosive device at acattleman’s confab, or builta shoe bomb. Or, in theircase, a hoof bomb. In fact, Idon’t think a bovine has evercommitted a single terroristact in this country, unlessyou believe all the poppy-cock about cattle blowingup the world with the green-house gases they emit.Believe me, I know cows,and they aren’t the type tobe suicide bombers.Come to find out, the

EPA has been flying suchspy missions for over adecade to determine iffeedlots are in compliancewith environmental laws in“impaired watersheds.”Whatever that is. Accordingto the Air Force, anyincriminating evidencefound against what they call“US persons” during suchspy flights can be sharedwith other governmentagencies and the cops. TheEPA also says that “theEPA has never taken anenforcement action solelyon the basis of these over-flights?” So why do it?I find such spy flights

disturbing because I HATEhaving my picture taken.That’s why most readersthink I’m 30 years youngerthan I really am; because I

continued on page two

by ROBERT KALLENBACH, University of Missouri

Drought-stricken forages that accumu-late nitrates can kill grazing livestock,quickly, warns a University of Missouriplant scientist.

“We’re getting reports of cattle dying,” saysRob Kallenbach, MU Extension forage spe-cialist. “As hot weather without rain contin-ues, we expect to hear of more death losses. Ithappens at the start of every drought.”Large grasses, such as corn, sorghum and

sudangrass hybrids, are most often the causeof problems, Kallenbach said on a statewideteleconference. Many plants, even ryegrassand fescue, can accumulate nitrates when soilmoisture becomes short.Johnsongrass and other common weeds

can be deadly also.Nitrogen is essential for forage and grain-

crop production. Nitrates are in the plants allthe time, creating normal growth. Nitrogenpicked up by plant roots from the soil movesup into the plant. Eventually the plant storesthat energy in the seed heads as protein.Nitrates are converted into amino acids,

which are building blocks for plant proteins.Protein is an essential part of animal diets.

When drought stops plants making protein,nitrate poisoning can kill grazing livestock

Lack of moisture stops the flow of nitratesup the plant and the conversion to protein. Theroots continue to bring nitrogen into the plant,where it accumulates first in the stalks. Toomuch unconverted nitrate can become toxic.In a drought, producers needing forage

turn cows to graze corn, sorghum or otherlarge grasses. Usually the only time a farmergrazes corn would be when it is obvious theplant will not make ears of corn for grain har-vest. Grazing is considered when droughtstops conversion of nitrate into protein.That’s when deadly trouble occurs.Cornstalks and other plants can be given a

quick test for nitrates. A few drops of testsolution on a split stalk turn deep blue whenhigh levels of nitrate are present.Most MU Extension county offices have

test kits to provide quick nitrate checks. Thistest gives only rough indications of potentialproblems. It’s a warning.A more accurate, quantitative test must be

done in a laboratory, but that takes time. Thelab test works best on stored forages such asbales, balage or silage.On the teleconference, a regional specialist

continued on page eight

Page 2 Livestock Market Digest July 15, 2012

that issue today for economicreasons.) Prior to the EU’s for-mation Italy, Denmark, theNetherlands, and Greece pro-hibited the use of hormones.Germany, which was the largestbeef producer in the EU, prohib-ited the use of synthetic hor-mones only, while five othermember countries, includingFrance and the United King-dom, permitted their use. In1981 a resolution against the useof hormones passed 177 to 1 infavor of a complete ban.Complicating matters on this

side of the pond was that manyU.S. consumers were sympathet-ic to the cause of the Europeans.

One of the biggest side effects ofthe trade war was the awakeningof the general public to the wholeissue of hormones. Both theConsumer Federation of Ameri-ca and the Center for Science inthe Public Interest lobbied for asimilar ban in this country, and inresponse to a survey conductedin 2002, 85 percent of thoseasked said they wanted mandato-ry labeling on beef produced withgrowth hormones. In many waysthe transatlantic hormone dis-pute gave birth to the entire “nat-ural” and “organic” movements inthis country.

Choosing SidesIn 1981, the EU restricted the

use of natural hormones to ther-apeutic purposes only and com-pletely banned synthetic hor-mones. The United Statesimmediately cried foul and tookits case to the new fledglingorganization that countriesaround the globe had put somuch faith in for solving suchproblems: The World TradeOrganization. It was to be aUnited Nations for globaltraders and the beef ban was oneof the first cases heard by theWTO. It came down squarely onthe side of the Americans, andCanadians who had sided withthem. It was a small victory forthe USDA and the Food andDrug Administration who pre-sented evidence that “hormonesin beef from an implanted ani-mal have no physiological signifi-cance for humans.”Despite the ruling, Europe

ignored the WTO and persistedwith its ban.Under WTO rules the EU

would have won had they pre-sented irrefutable scientific proofthat hormones in beef causehealth problems in humans. Butafter 50-plus years and 30 differ-ent growth-promoting productsbeing used on livestock, the EUdidn’t convince the WTO thatthere is any risk posed by hor-mones being used currently.Despite the ruling, EU scien-

tists say that when manure fromfactory farms where animalshave been administered hor-mones enters the surroundingenvironment the hormones cancontaminate the water supply.They cite recent studies they sayshow that exposure to hormonesin just such a way has a substan-tial effect on the gender andreproductive capacity of fish.They also contend that childrenare particularly sensitive to thesehormones and that they cancause sudden growth or breastdevelopment, genital abnormali-ties in baby boys, and unbornchildren of pregnant womencould be abnormally affected.

They also argued that there is anincreased risk of cancers later inlife as a result of eating hormonetainted meat.The EU feels they have strong

evidence and after its mad cowdebacle, they would rather err onthe side of caution. But theWTO doesn’t permit such cau-tion and their position is that thehormone ban “is inconsistentwith its obligations.” The U.S. position, on the oth-

er hand, is summed up in thewords of a trade representative:“The human body is continuallymaking the natural hormonesthat are subject to the EU’s ban,and these hormones also occurnaturally in foods such as eggsand butter, often in concentra-tions substantially greater than inmeat from cattle treated withthese hormones."U.S. lawyers point to the

widespread and long-term use ofhormones in over 20 countries asevidence that they inflict noharm, and in 1997 a WTO dis-pute settlement panel agreed.This prompted the EU to com-mission even more studies toprove their point. But the WTOwasn’t buying it.

Carousel RetaliationSince the EU didn’t abide by

WTO rules and get rid of theirban, the WTO proclaimed theU.S. had a right to add on aretaliatory tariff on EU importsvalued at $93 million, whichstayed in effect until May 1996.Then after still no relaxation ofthe beef trade barrier, the U.S.and Canada imposed $125 mil-lion in tariffs on EU goods. Here’s where the story gets a

little crazy. It was determinedthat the initial ban caused harmto American ranchers to the tuneof about $100 million. So theWTO allowed the U.S. to imposeextra tariffs on such EU prod-ucts as goose pâté, Roquefortcheese, truffles, onions, carrots,

C A L L 1 - 8 0 0 - 4 5 1 - 5 9 9 7 o r v i s i t W W W. F A R M C R E D I T N M . C O M

A L B U Q U E R Q U E • R O S W E L L • L A S C R U C E S • T U C U M C A R I • C L O V I S

� ese days, knowing who you do business with is more important than ever. At Farm Credit of

New Mexico, we’re more than bankers. We’re farmers and ranchers, too. We have a unique understanding

of the � nancial tools and services you need to succeed – with none of the big bank attitude.

Subscribe Today

NAME

ADDRESS

CITY STATE ZIP

My check is enclosed for:

� One Year: $19.95 � Two Years $29.95

Clip & mail to: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194

LivestockMarket

Digest

Subscription Rates: $19.95 per year

Livestock Market Digest (ISSN 0024-5208) (USPS NO. 712320) is published monthly except semi-monthly in September by

Rainy Day, Inc. at 2231 Rio Grande Blvd. NW, Albuquerque, NM 87104. Periodicals Postage Paid at Albuquerque, N.M.

POSTMASTER – Send change of address to: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194

For advertising, subscription and editorial inquiries write or call: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458Albuquerque, N.M. 87194Telephone: 505/243-9515Fax: 505/998-6236www.aaalivestock.com

EDITORIAL and ADVERTISING STAFF:

CAREN COWAN, PublisherLEE PITTS, Executive EditorCHUCK STOCKS, Publisher Emeritus

FALL MARKETING EDITION AD SALES:

RON ARCHER, 505/865-6011archerron@aol.com

FIELD EDITOR:

DELVIN HELDERMON580/622-5754, 1094 Koller Rd.Sulphur, OK 73086

ADMINISTRATIVE and PRODUCTION STAFF:

MARGUERITE VENSEL, Office Mgr.

CAROL PENDLETON,Special Assistance

CAMILLE PANSEWICZ,Graphic Artist

One Tough Customer continued from page one

continued on page three

U.S. lawyers point to the widespread and long-term use of hormones in over 20 countries as evidence

that they inflict no harm.

July 15, 2012 “America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper” Page 3

preserved tomatoes, soups, yarn,Dijon mustard, juices, chicory,toasted breads, French choco-late, jams, glue and wool grease.According to the WTO “theimposition of these higher dutiesis intended to restore the bal-ance of trade concessions underthe WTO and to induce compli-ance by the EU.”One would think that if it was

our beef producers who werehurt that the 100 million dollarsthey supposedly lost as a result ofthe beef ban would be given backto them in some form. I know Ididn’t get any part of the punitivetariffs, did you? Meanwhile, con-sumers on both sides of theocean paid more for their food.How would you feel if you

made Dijon mustard in Europebut were taxed extra on food yousold to the U.S. as a result of abeef over beef? Naturally, farm-ers in the EU protested theinjustice, so in January 2009, thelist of EU products subject toincreased tariffs was changed.Those who produced onions, car-rots, processed tomatoes, toast-ed breads, coffee, mustard, fishproducts, soups, yarns, and gluein the EU got a reprieve. Nowthe extra tariff would be appliedto pork products, cut flowers andplants, processed fruits, nuts,fruit juices, oats, drinking water,confectionary and chewing gum.Those who made Roquefortcheese in Europe must have real-ly made someone mad becausetheir tariff rose from 100 percentto 300 percent! That’s right,when you ordered Roquefortdressing at your favorite restau-rant you paid three times more

for it because of a dispute overbeef hormones!The pain was not spread

equally among countries either.Products from France, Ger-many, Italy, Denmark, Austria,Belgium, Finland, Greece, Ire-land, Luxembourg, the Nether-lands, Portugal, Spain, and Swe-den were taxed, but productsfrom the United Kingdom werenot because they supported lift-ing the ban. And we wonderwhat those who produce hairclippers and motorcycles did toavoid the high tariffs, as theywere scheduled to be on the tar-iff hit list as well, but wereexcused at the last minute.As a result of all these extra

tariffs the EU went to the WTOonce again to plead its case andclaimed that these extra tariffswere an “escalation” of the tradewar and “more punitive” thanthey needed to be. In responsethe WTO came down with awishy-washy ruling that said theU.S. could continue its tradesanctions and the EU could con-tinue its ban against hormonetreated beef. The only goodthing they came up with was thatthe EU had to allow in a limitedamount of U.S. beef, but it hadto be NHTC, or non hormonetreated. In the U.S. there was nomad dash for this market and ini-tially only 13 entities were audit-ed and approved as sources ofNHTC beef.

Cease FireIn 2009 the United States and

the EU finally got together andagreed to at least try to agree.They signed a Memorandum of

Understanding in hopes ofresolving this long festering con-flict. They agreed specifically onthree things: First, that the EUwould give the United Statesmore market access. They’d allow20,000 metric tons of beef (upfrom 11,500 metric tons) into the

EU duty free. But it still had tobe produced without hormones.It also had to be what they called“High Quality Beef”. Leavingthemselves open for more dis-agreements in the future listen tohow the WTO partially definedthe “high quality beef” eligible forexport to the EU. “Carcasses ofheifers and steers less than 30months of age which have onlybeen fed a diet, for at least thelast 100 days before slaughter,containing not less than 62 per-cent of concentrates and/or feedgrain co-products on a dietarydry matter basis that meet orexceed a metabolizable energy(ME) content greater than 12.26megajoules (MJ) per one kilo-gram of dry matter.” The restric-tions go on like this for pages.Under phase two of the agree-

ment the EU would grantincreased quota up to 45,000metric tons of “high qualitybeef.” In return, the U.S. agreedto reduce tariffs on selectedproducts. During phase three ofthe agreement the EU wouldmaintain the quota at 45,000

metric tons and they would workon “longer-term resolution of thedispute.” As a result of all thishaggling the volume of hormone-free beef exempted from tariffswill be set at 48,200 tons nextmonth (August 2012). That’s45,000 tons for U.S. beef and

3,200 tons for Canadian imports.But who wants to jump

through all the hoops necessaryto qualify when there are othercountries who want our beef andaren’t quite so demanding?

Who Won?So after 30 years who were

the winners and losers of thehormone war?Some might suggest that the

health-conscious American con-sumer won because the use ofimplants on calves sold throughvideo auctions has fallen from64.3 percent in 1995 to 26.2 per-cent in 2007. But that is a bitmisleading. Ranchers who sellnatural cattle have definitelyreceived a premium from cattlefeeders but a big part of that isthe fact that the feeders wantthem natural so that when theyadminister the hormones they’llget a bigger bang for their buck.It’s estimated that two-thirds ofAmerican cattle raised in feedlotsare still treated with hormones.It doesn’t feel like American

ranchers won because who need-

ed the EU beef market as theU.S. has found plenty of willingbuyers in other parts of theworld. And U.S. beef exportsdon’t add up to a sizable share ofthe EU beef import market any-way. But perhaps before we gettoo cocky, we’d remind everyonethat U.S. beef exports throughApril were down 11 percent fromyear-earlier levels. Exports toJapan were down 7 percent,Canada 6 percent and Mexico 9percent. Exports to South Koreawere down a whopping 32 per-cent as a result of our latest madcow, and Hong Kong was down18 percent year-over-year. A rel-atively stronger U.S. dollar islargely to blame. At the sametime we brought into this coun-try 22 percent more beef fromyear-earlier levels. So we’d sug-gest there is no market that wecan flippantly ignore. Even ifthey are tough customers.As for the health risks associ-

ated with hormones, after 30years of arguing we still have notreached a definitive conclusionon most of them. It seems wedon’t know much more than wedid back when this entire tradefiasco began.What about EU ranchers who

were afraid of a massive influx ofNorth American beef destroyingtheir market? Did they win? Getthis: after all the haggling and anincrease in our quota, the EUactually sold more beef to usthan we did to them! So who really won the hor-

mone war? The landscape is lib-erally littered with losers on bothcontinents. As for the victors,well, they are much harder tofind. And despite the flimsytruce, the conflict still rages on.

Custom Cattle Feeding at its

Finest!Bar-G

FEEDYARDJohnny Trotter,

President / General Mgr.Res: 806/364-1172 • Mob.: 806/346-2508

Email: jtrotter@bar-g.comKevin Bunch, Assistant Manager

Mike Blair, ComptrollerMike Anthony, Shipping/Receiving

PO BOX 1797HEREFORD, TX 79045

806/357-2241

125,000-Head Capacity

8 MILES SOUTHWEST OF HEREFORD, TEXASFINANCING AVAILABLE

One Tough Customer continued from page two

It was determined that the initial ban caused harm to American ranchers

to the tune of about $100 million.

Page 4 Livestock Market Digest July 15, 2012

To protect the businessesand livelihoods of theirmemberships, groups rep-resenting hunters, fisher-

man, agriculture, trappers, andrural communities andeconomies have intervened in alawsuit filed by the WildEarthGuardians against the NewMexico Department of Game &Fish.The New Mexico Trappers’

Association, New Mexico CattleGrowers’ Association, New Mex-ico Wool Growers, Inc., NewMexico Federal Lands Council,New Mexico Council of Outfit-ters & Guides, New MexicoFarm and Livestock Bureau,Coalition of Arizona/New Mexi-co Counties for Stable EconomicGrowth and United Sportsmenfor Fish & Wildlife, Inc., joinedthe lawsuit which would prohibittrapping in the southwesternNew Mexico, in the MexicanGrey Wolf Recovery Area. TheNew Mexico Houndsmen aswell as the Northern and theSouthern New Mexico Chaptersof the Safari Club assisted withfunding. The Safari Club Inter-national also filed an Amicus

Brief in support of the state.“The big difference between

our memberships and theWildEarth Guardians is that ourmembers have everything to losein this situation, and environ-mentalists have nothing at stake.If residents of southwestern NewMexico lose the ability to trap,they lose their ability to make aliving ranching, hunting, trap-ping or outfitting – not to men-tion generations of tradition,”said New Mexico Cattle Grow-ers’ Association President RexWilson, Carrizozo. “No environ-mentalists’ family businesses orlifelong investments are at risk inthis situation.”The WildEarth Guardians’

lawsuit claims that by allowingtrapping of viable furbearer pop-ulations in the wolf recoveryarea, the NMDGF is allowingharm to the non-essential, exper-imental Mexican Grey Wolf,despite the fact that trapping thespecies is not allowed, Wilsonexplained. The federal reintro-duction program for the Mexi-can Grey Wolf began in 1994.

“To date, millions of our taxdollars have been spent to rein-troduce this predator, which isstill struggling in the wild almost20 years later,” said David Reese,United Sportsmen for Fish &Wildlife President, Belen. “TheWildEarth Guardians are tryingto use trapping as an excuse forthe failure of the reintroductionprogram, which has been a mon-umental waste of time andresources since the beginning.”Rural southwestern New

Mexico’s economy is based onranching, hunting, guiding andoutfitting, all of which would bethreatened if the lawsuit was suc-cessful. “Ranchers must have theability to protect their livestockto stay in business,” said BeboLee, New Mexico Federal LandsCouncil President, Alamogordo.“Dealing with wolves on theiroperations has been hard enoughon these ranchers – it’s too muchto ask that they sacrifice evenmore of their herds to otherpredators.”Hunting and trapping have a

long history in New Mexico, as a

family tradition, as a tool forwildlife management and inmany cases, a successful liveli-hood. Despite the impacts of thewolf reintroduction program tothe deer and elk herds in the GilaNational Forest, guiding andoutfitting is a big business, with abig impact on rural counties.“The survival of our members’

businesses, and their ability tofeed their families, depend onhealthy wildlife populations, andthat means balanced manage-ment which includes predatorcontrol,” said Marc Kincaid,New Mexico Wool Growers, Inc.President, Hope. “Aside fromthe potential financial impacts toour members and the small-townbusinesses they help support, it’sjust irresponsible to put wildlifemanagement in the hands ofenvironmentalists and animalrights groups in Santa Fe whoseonly concerns are filing lawsuitsand limiting land use.”“This lawsuit has the potential

to alter science based game man-agement everywhere. The suit isdesigned to take game manage-ment out of the hands of statesand move it to the courts.WildEarth now chastises the

New Mexico Game Departmentfor using sportsmen’s dollars, nottax dollars, to defend New Mexi-cans and New Mexico’s wildlifeagainst a frivolous lawsuit. Incourt documents they seek todeny participation of an interna-tional conservation group, theSafari Club International in thelitigation process. It seems to be alright for the

‘guardians’ to squander millionsof sportsmen’s and taxpayer dol-lars to advance their spiritualbeliefs through court actions but,the very people that have paidthe bills for wildlife recovery andmanagement over the last centu-ry, can’t play in their ‘sand box’;how ludicrous is that?” askedTom McDowell PresidentNMTA, Corrales. “Westernstates are dealing with the devas-tating impacts of forests beingmanaged by the courts and anti-consumptive use groups. NewMexico and Arizona saw thelargest fires in history in 2011and we just set two more recordsin the past few weeks. IfWildEarth were to prevail withits current action, New Mexi-cans can say goodbye to theirwildlife, too.”

• 5,000-Head Capacity• Backgrounding and Finishing

• Feeding silage, alfalfa hay, corn and barley

• Hedging on Request

IVAN, BRAD & JEREMY COWLEY546 N. Venice Main St., Venice, Utah 84701

435/896-5260cowleyfarm@hotmail.com

CowleyFarm & Feedlot Company

Three generations serving you

����� ����������!

���������� �������

��� ��������������+2����

�3%-.#0-&��������,'1'(/% %$.(.�*%/

���������

�0))��%".+*��)3��+*/-+)�������4�*31'%-%5

�� ����������������������������������

Industry Groups Intervene in Trapping Lawsuit

by ROD SMITH, FEEDSTUFFS.com

JBS S.A. has reported that it plans tobegin legal proceedings againstGreenpeace after the activist environ-mental group issued a report accus-

ing the company of engaging in thedeforestation of the Amazon biome, orrainforest.JBS said the report could adversely

affect its sales but didn’t indicate whatdamages it might seek. The companydenied all of the accusations.Greenpeace, in a report issued on

June 6, charged that JBS, the largest beefprocessor in Brazil and the largest meatpacker in the world, has violated a 2009agreement by buying cattle from regionsof the Amazon where cattle producersare grazing herds on deforested landand/or using workers who are in debt-slavery conditions.Greenpeace said it drew its conclu-

sions from its own field investigators andfrom reports by Ibama, Brazil’s environ-mental protection agency.However, JBS countered that a num-

ber of the ranchers cited by Greenpeaceas damaging the Amazon biome were notblacklisted by Ibama at the time JBS pur-chased cattle from them and that otherranchers cited by Greenpeace are notblacklisted by Ibama or are not suppliersto JBS.The Greenpeace information “is false,

incorrect, misleading and induces thepublic to draw erroneous conclusions,”JBS said. Because of this, JBS said itwould use “all available legal channels torepair the damage (Greenpeace) causedto the company’s image through disclo-

sure of incorrect information.”JBS and three additional Brazilian

meat packers signed a Greenpeace-bro-kered agreement three years ago thatthey would not source cattle from defor-ested land or from land reserved forindigenous people (Feedstuffs, Aug. 24,2009).Major retailers, including Carrefour

S.A. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc., were alsoparties to the agreement.Similar agreements have been negoti-

ated in recent years with major soybeanbuyers and traders, including ArcherDaniels Midland Inc., Cargill Inc. andLouis Dreyfus Commodities, not to buysoybeans that are grown on deforestedAmazon land.Brazilian Sen. Katia Abreu, a leading

member of the agricultural caucus andpresident of the Brazilian National Agri-culture & Livestock Federation, said thecountry’s farmers and ranchers are coop-erating in efforts to decrease rainforestdestruction.She noted that in the most recent

year where data is available (August2010-July 2011), deforestation not onlycontinued to slow but hit its lowest-everannual level.JBS said it has more than 50 employ-

ees directly involved in sustainabilityactivities, which include incentive pro-grams to develop a sustainable beef sup-ply system and satellite monitoring of theAmazon biome.JBS, headquartered in Sao Paulo,

Brazil, is the third-largest beef processorand third-largest pork processor in theU.S. It recorded 2011 sales that totaled61.8 billion reals ($34.1 billion).

Sierra Club Sets Anti-Trapping PolicyU.S. SPORTSMEN’S ALLIANCE

In a May 19th written statement fromthe Sierra Club’s Board of Directors,the group has officially gone on recordas opposing nearly any and all forms of

trapping — period.The official statement concealed on the

group’s website notes that:“The Sierra Club considers body-grip-

ping, restraining and killing traps andsnares to be ecologically indiscriminateand unnecessarily inhumane and there-fore opposes their use.”Sierra Club, thought by many sports-

men to be no friend to hunting — andnow an official and publically recognizedanti-trapping group — says it supports“humane” methods of solving human andwildlife conflicts. No guidelines on theirdefinition of “humane” were revealed.Oddly enough, the final sentence in the

official statement notes that the SierraClub recognizes the rights of indigenouspeople under federal law and treaties inthe taking of wildlife. So is this, however,a nod in favor of trapping?Trapping is a widely accepted and vital

method of reducing raccoons, beavers,muskrats and other species that prey onnesting songbirds, gobble up young water-fowl, destroy countless dollars of timberand crops each year in America, and basi-cally wreak havoc on everything fromhighways to lakes.“For a group that’s concerned about the

environment, the Sierra Club’s call to endtrapping could lead to one of the mostdamaging conservation disasters in Ameri-can history,” said Bud Pidgeon, presidentand CEO of the U.S. Sportsmen’sAlliance. “Trapping is accepted by and anecessary tool of wildlife professionalsfrom coast to coast. But, this policy fromthe Sierra Club comes as no surprise to thevast majority of sportsmen and women.”

View the Sierra Club Board of Directors memo, go tohttp://www.sierraclub.org/policy/conservation/ Trapping-Wildlife.pdf

JBS to sue Greenpeace over deforestation report

� Greenpeace accuses JBS of violating agreement concerning cattle purchases from Amazon suppliers.

� JBS denies all charges and says it will seek damages for lost sales.� Brazilian senator says farmers and ranchers working to protect rainforest.

July 15, 2012 “America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper” Page 5

by JOE PARKER, JR.,President, Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association

If history is any indicator, thenwe can be sure of one thing— when the government getstoo involved, the problem

usually gets worse. Flip throughpages of history and you’ll seeexamples of this time and timeagain.Common sense tells us that

we should learn from our mis-takes, but unfortunately, that’snot always the case in Washing-ton, D.C.Case in point — Sen. Dianne

Feinstein from California andRep. Kurt Schrader from Oregonrecently introduced legislationthat would federally dictate howeggs can be produced. S. 3239and H.R. 3798, the Egg Prod-ucts Inspection Act Amend-

ments of 2012, would codify anagreement between the UnitedEgg Producers and the HumaneSociety of the United States(HSUS) calling for federallymandated production practicesin the poultry business.This is a slippery slope for all

livestock producers, and a roadbetter left untraveled.Here’s why. America’s farm-

ers and ranchers are expertswhen it comes to taking care oftheir animals. Governmentbureaucrats are not. Neither aresneaky executives at HSUS.Many of them have never spentsignificant time on a workingcattle ranch.Ranchers are experts on ani-

mal care because it’s our obliga-tion. It’s the right thing to doand we know quality beef beginswith quality care. This is why wework tirelessly to keep our live-stock healthy, safe and secure.We take this commitment soseriously that we personallyinvest millions of our own dollarsinto programs like the BeefQuality Assurance program andthe Cattle Industry’s Guidelinesfor the Care and Handling ofCattle. These programs andguidelines are designed by trueexperts including ranchers, vet-erinarians, animal scientists andanimal care specialists with onlythe best interest of cattle inmind.Let’s dig deeper and look at

the lobbyist group behind thislegislation — HSUS. It’s nosecret this group wants to elimi-nate all animal food production.A staffer at HSUS has gone as

far to state that his “goal is theabolition of all animal agricul-ture.”HSUS can’t make consumers

stop eating beef, but they canraise millions of dollars underfalse pretenses and turn aroundand use that money to buy votesin Congress that hamstring thelivestock industry. They do thiswith the hope that it will eventu-ally become too burdensome andexpensive for family ranches tostay in operation.The intention behind S. and

H.R. 3798 is not to better pro-tect livestock. If it were, the gov-ernment would heed the adviceof the World Organization ofAnimal Health when it acknowl-edged that mandated animalproduction practices are not inthe best interest of promotingtrue animal welfare. They wouldwork alongside ranchers ratherthan weigh them down withcostly and unnecessary regula-tions.Passing this legislation as a

stand-alone bill isn’t the onlyoption HSUS is seeking. There

has been talk about includingthis as an amendment to the2012 Farm Bill, or other ag-relat-ed bills that come through theHouse or Senate. They will dowhatever it takes to see this legis-lation become law.Unfounded and irresponsible

lawmaking like this could even-tually disable ranchers like mefrom providing families, both athome and abroad, with a safe,abundant and healthy food sup-ply. We simply cannot afford forthat to happen.This is why it is so important

for ranchers to band togetherthrough TSCRA. Togetherthrough a strong membership,we can help elect officials whounderstand and respect the beefindustry and stop HSUS andother anti-agriculture groupsfrom chipping away at the live-stock industry one senseless reg-ulation at a time.

Joe Parker Jr. is a third generation rancherfrom Clay County, Texas. He is president of theTexas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Associ-ation. He is also chairman of the board andpresident of the First National Bank of Byers.

haven’t had a new photo takenfor my column in three decades.I’m really older than dirt!I’m uncomfortable living in a

world where eyes are every-where. I can’t enjoy shoppingbecause I know there are hiddencameras in the ceiling and I’mafraid they’ll catch me scratchingmyself, or showing my “badside.” Which is pretty muchevery side of me. Mind you, I’mnot doing anything illegal, I justdon’t want my embarrassingmoments captured for posterityon a security camera. I want mysights unseen. That’s one reasonwhy I’ve become a hermit, hidingin the house so I won’t be caughton camera. I hope the big baldspot on the top of my head friestheir cameras! The trouble I have with all this

“eye in the sky” stuff is the sameproblem I have in spelling thename of the town where I’velived for 35 years. The small townis called Los Osos. Oh sure, Iknow all the letters just fine, butwith all the O’s and S’s in a rowsometimes I get carried away anddon’t know when to stop.Neither will our government.

One minute the EPA is spy-ing on steers in North Platte andthe next thing you know they’llhave a webcam in your televisionset watching you slice onions, orpet the dog in that secret spotthat makes her leg jerk uncon-trollably. Or they’ll have an armyof Peeping Toms lookingthrough your plate glass window.Don’t forget to smile and “Say

Cheese.”I’m telling you, it won’t be long

before the feds are using drones,which can be smaller than a base-ball, to check on vegetable farm-ers to make sure their rows arestraight, and satellite images willbe used in court against a cowboyfor roping a non-bovine beast. Ihate the idea of knowing thatsome sick government geek with ajoystick is watching on a bank ofmonitors every move we make.“Hey Joe, check out the bazoomson this nude sunbathing beauty inher backyard in Hollywood.” Or.“Mary, you should see this sickowith his arm up a cow’s rump inAmarillo.”You just know the FBI will

take that preg-checking sceneout of context.

San Angelo Packing Co., Inc.

1809 NORTH BELL ST., SAN ANGELO,

TEXAS 76903

P.O. BOX 1469, SAN ANGELO, TEXAS 76902

800/588-6328 • 800/LUV-MEAT

A DIRECT MARKET FOR

THE PRODUCER

A BUYER OF QUALITY SLAUGHTER COWS & BULLS

Competitive market for all breeds of cattle. Available to receive 24/7. Prompt and courteous service

Riding Herd CONTINUED FROM PAGE ONERanchers trump politicians,activists when it comes to cattle

A staffer at HSUS has gone as far to state that his “goal is the abolition of all animal

agriculture."

BaxterBLACKO N T H E E D G E O F C O M M O N S E N S E

Page 6 Livestock Market Digest July 15, 2012

vent any new gas plants frombeing built’ and to end naturalgas production in this country.”It appears as though Inhofe

was right. Armendariz’s lawyer,Danny Onorato, did not respondto requests for comment at thetime about why Armendariz wasat the Sierra Club.Armendariz will be helping

the Sierra Club with its “BeyondCoal” campaign, which waslaunched in 2002 in reaction totrends in the power market tobuild more than 150 new coal-fired power plants. The cam-paign’s goal has been retirementof one-third of the nation’s more500-plus coal plants by 2020.National Journal reported in Maythat the Sierra Club was dou-bling down on its efforts to com-bat new natural-gas productionwith a “Beyond Gas” campaignmodeled after the “Beyond Coal”campaign.

Armendariz made the “crucify”comments, speculated at thattime that Armendariz’s visit tothe Sierra Club was for a job

interview.“Rather than testifying in the

House and being accountablefor carrying out the Obama-EPA’s ‘crucify them’ agenda, itappears Mr. Armendariz mayhave had a job interview with theSierra Club,” Inhofe said at thetime. “With such an impressivejob-killing resume, it would beno surprise if the Sierra Club isrecruiting him for their ‘BeyondGas’ campaign designed to ‘pre-

TO SUPPORT THESE CAUSES AND MORE, JOIN US!

I am/our organization is committed to protecting the open spaces, private property, private businesses & ensuring theresponsible use of public lands. Please list me/my organization as a member of the Western Legacy Alliance.

I have included my membership dues and my $____________ additional contribution.

Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________Organization: _______________________________________________________________________________Address: ________________________________________ City: __________________________ State: _____Zip: __________ Phone: __________________ Fax: __________________ Email: ______________________

936 West 350 North • Blackfoot, ID 83221 westernlegacyalliance@gmail.com • 208-681-6004www.westernlegacyalliance.org

What They are Saying About Us…• The $206,098,920 Endangered Species Act Settlement Agreements — Is all that paperwork worth it?

• Leveling the Playing Field: Support for the Grazing Improvement Act of 2011

• Support for the Governmental Litigation Savings Act of 2011 — Reform of Excessive Litigation Pay-outs

• Foreign & Domestic Train Wreck in the Making — More of the ESA

• The Secret World of the Animal Rights Agenda

You Can Help

JOIN TODAY!

IndividualMembership:$25AssociationMembership:$500CorporateMembership:$1,000

Working to Protect the Rich Tapestry of the West

The Earth recycles naturally.Plants give off oxygen andabsorb carbon dioxide. Ani-mals take up oxygen and

give off carbon dioxide. Animalseat plants, digest and deposit it asfiber, minerals and nutrientswhich the plants use to grow.

ny who will DNA-test every dogin the neighborhood. He intro-duced the idea to the community.It is now a rule that every dogowner inside the developmentmust submit his canine for DNAidentification. The idea being thatwhen a homeowner spots a POP(poop on property), they call thePP (poop patrol) and report adrive-by pooping, officially calleda PWP (pooping without permis-sion). The PP arrives in the PPR(poop Prius) and, wearing a Haz-mat suit, Playtex gloves and usinga specially designed PPU (pooppicker-upper), they select a speci-men and place it in a PPC (plas-tic poop container) to take to thelaboratory.The DNA is analyzed and

compared to the DNA of canineresidents, and the guilty owner ispunished; $100 fine or two weekscommunity service on the PP, inthe PPR, responding to PWPsand driving to the scene of thecrime where the POP was report-ed. It seems to be working,despite the occasional bear, coy-ote, or raccoon drive-by NDP(not dog poop) sighting.I suggested that maybe this

technique could be used on otherspecies. “Too expensive for cows,”said Thurman, “And, thanks tothe Insane (humane) Society ofthe U.S. and their “unintendedconsequences,” the last thingthose thousands of citizens aban-doning their horses in parks andon farms want . . . is to be identi-fied as the owner! They prefer tothink they are recycling!

Dog DNA

by AMY HARDER, www.nationaljournal.com

The Environmental Protec-tion Agency official whorecently resigned for sayingthe government should

“crucify” bad actors in the energyindustry will now be working forthe Sierra Club to help its cam-paign against coal.The organization announced

that it was hiring Al Armendariz,who resigned on April 30 as EPAregional administrator for Texas,Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana,and New Mexico after an uproarover his comment that EPA’s“general philosophy” with itsenforcement policy should be to“crucify” oil and natural-gas com-panies.“This is an exciting day for

clean energy and public healthsupporters in Texas,” said BruceNilles, senior campaign director

for the Sierra Club’s “BeyondCoal” campaign, in a statementon recently. “Al has workedclosely with the Sierra Club formany years, as an environmentalscientist and professor. Heunderstands the critical impor-tance of developing clean energyto create jobs, protect peopleand protect air and water.”The hire will likely inflame an

already heated debate amongcongressional Republicans, theObama administration, andinfluential environmental groupslike the Sierra Club. HouseEnergy and Commerce Commit-tee Republicans have recentlylashed out at the Sierra Club —the country’s largest environ-mental group — for its intensi-fied campaign seeking to weanthe country off not only coal andoil, but natural gas, too.

National Journal reported ear-lier this month that on the same

day Armendariz initially agreedto testify in front of a HouseEnergy and Commerce subcom-mittee regarding his comments,

he was at the Sierra Club’sWashington offices later thatday. Armendariz abruptly can-celed his plans to testify less than24 hours before the hearing anddid not provide the committeewith a reason why, but he wasstill in town to meet with theenvironmental group.Senate Environment and Pub-

lic Works ranking member JamesInhofe, R-Okla., whose staffuncovered the 2010 video where

Sierra Club Hires EPA Official Felled by ‘Crucify’ Comments

With such an impressive job-killing resume, it would be no surprise if the Sierra Club is recruiting him

for their ‘Beyond Gas’ campaign designed to ‘prevent any new gas plants from being built’.

www.baxterblack.com

Many examples exist in nature.However, when man steps into

the relationship, even for goodreason (food, clothing and shel-ter) he upsets the cycle. He doesit knowing there will be conse-quences. In rural communitieswhere livestock live, we havelearned how to handle the hugeamounts of “animal waste” thatare produced by our cattle andhogs. Farmers have been recy-cling since Adam discovered thatfertilizing his garden made thingsgrow better. It is part of the cycleof nature.This ‘spreading of manure’ is

more difficult in urban housingdevelopments or mall parking lots,but according to Thurman, myauthority on the subject, one of hisfriends has taken on the touchysubject of dogs pooping in theirneighbor’s yard. In defense of thedog, they are fully aware of thestigma attached to someone whois known for “pooping in his ownbackyard.” But we have desensi-tized them. After all, humans andcats now poop in the house!But . . . the neighbor doesn’t

care about the dog’s stigma, orthe natural cycle, or the benefit ofdog poop (DP) fertilizer forBermuda grass. He’s more con-cerned about hitting the hiddentorpedoes with his lawn mowerand spackling the side of hishouse!Neighbors’ dogs are a con-

tentious subject. Enter Thur-man’s friend who lives in a gatedcommunity where pets areallowed. He discovered a compa-

July 15, 2012 “America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper” Page 7

by LAURA NELSON, Certified Angus Beef, LLC

Eating satisfaction ruleswhen it comes to makingbeef lovers happy. That wasclear in early results from

the 2011 National Beef QualityAudit (NBQA), but definingthat satisfaction seemed harderto pinpoint. “If producers get the right sig-

nal, and they are pretty goodmanagers, they can hit the tar-get,” said Keith Belk, ColoradoState University meat scientist.“But they have to have the rightsignal.”One constant beacon comes

from the Q-word in that audit,which has run every five yearssince 1991: people at every linkin the beef chain want quality. Acall for more Prime and premi-um Choice beef rang out, withthe target-consumer consensussuggesting 5 percent and 31 per-cent, respectively. Actual pro-duction levels for all beef inthose categories during 2011 was2 percent and 20 percent, 14points short of expectations.Science has proven marbling

at those levels brings increasedeating satisfaction, so it’s no sur-prise that the NBQA showedconsumers want more of thatbeef.The audit format asks cus-

tomers who buy feeder calves,fed cattle, beef carcasses, subpri-mals and variety meats to defineseven quality attributes. Thoseincluded food safety, eating sat-isfaction, cattle genetics, visualcharacteristics, how and wherecattle were raised, lean, fat,weight and size. Once ranked,the survey burrowed deeper intothe meaning and value of each.On the production end, feed-

ers, packers and allied industryranked “tenderness” as the topdefinition for eating satisfaction,followed by “good beef flavor.”Respondents in the foodserviceand retail industries had it justthe other way around. “We need to continue striving

toward improving eating satisfac-tion, and there will be an empha-sis on flavor there,” Belk said.“Flavor has pulled to the top;once you have satisfactory ten-derness, then flavor is all of asudden elevated in its relativeimportance.”In foodservice, 63 percent of

respondents favored flavor astheir definition, while 52 percentsaid tenderness and 29 percentcalled it customer satisfaction.“This was the first year that

we saw flavor mentioned moreimportantly than tenderness,”said Deb VanOverbeke, Oklaho-ma State University animal sci-entist. “Flavor really was empha-sized by the end users, but it isstill defined differently amongthose who are buying live cattle.”All NBQA respondents were

purchasers of live animals or beef

product, and VanOverbeke saidthat divide reflects their views onthe resale value of each qualityterm. In this era of branded beefprograms that reward higher qual-ity and consumer-based targets,performance further down thechain has become more valuable. “They are looking at where to

filter the product in once it is intheir system,” she said, “trying todetermine how to best spendand best capture each dollar.”The terms by which eating

satisfaction was defined mayhave differed among the seg-ments, but their pursuit of thatdollar never wavered. A newaspect of the study brought tolight beef buyers’ willingness topay for the traits they foundmost important.While only 2 percent of those

who purchase live cattle said thateating satisfaction was a require-ment they must have in order tobuy, nearly half of them saidthey’d pay a premium of 11.4percent to guarantee that quali-ty. That premium level rankedNo. 1 in the amount packers andfeeders said they would payabove base price to guaranteeany quality attribute.VanOverbeke said readiness

to pay that premium on the live-animal side may correlate toanother term the NBQA workedto define: cattle genetics. Pack-ers, feeders, retailers and food-service professionals defined“cattle genetics” for quality as apredominantly black hide. Fourout of five listed “genetic poten-tial for marbling” as their sec-ond-ranked term.Those definitions likely per-

tained to feeders who are supply-ing branded beef programs, sheexplained: “If they know whatthose genetics are going to getthem, they might pay a premiumfor those cattle because of howthey typically perform.”More than 20 percent of

respondents closest to end userssaid “eating satisfaction” was anabsolute requirement for pur-chasing. That quality had thehighest share (47 percent) ofrespondents willing to pay extraas well — about 11 percent more— to guarantee it.Belk said taking a whole-

industry perspective from thesurvey illuminates a clear paththe success: “If you align a sup-ply chain that addresses a specif-ic consumer target and has spe-cific process control all the wayup and down the chain toaddress that target, then thewhole system is more profitable.”VanOverbeke agreed the bot-

tom line comes down to tying allthose surveyed industry seg-ments together: “If you knowwho your customer is and youknow what they are looking for,you are more likely to targetsome premiums that you mightbe able to earn by doing a fewthings differently.”

by NEVIL C. SPEER, PhD, MBA, Feedstuffs Foodlink

Iturned to my family and said, “That’s precise-ly the point!” By chance I had stumbledacross the perfect contrast for our time. ButI’m getting ahead of myself — let me back

up a few days.It all began with an email I received as part

of a list-serve subscription. The message origi-nated from a university professor looking forfeedback regarding efforts to develop a new pro-gram of study for students interested in agricul-ture — all part of a larger initiative around theconcept of sustainability.The overarching objective of the new pro-

gram is an endeavor to “. . . promote agricultureat a human-scale, that is, agriculture that pro-vides meaningful work for people, is localizedenough for those involved to understand andwitness the feedback loops and that is resilient(in face of looming uncertainty ecologically andeconomically).” Specifically, the project wouldrequire new curriculum. And so the email wasrequesting input regarding what types of cours-es and/or material should be included to sup-port such a mission.However, from my perspective, that’s the

wrong place to begin. It’s always interesting tome how the concept of sustainability can beinvoked without any real tough questions as tothe premise or context in which it’s being used.The term has gotten overworked and inherentlyevokes the concept of political correctness. Sowhatever agenda you might have, now you canjust hitch your wagon to the term “sustainabili-ty” and it’s fairly easy to find some traction.What about the premise? That’s especially

important when “sustainability” gets leveragedas an indictment against agriculture. Case-in-point, the professor’s email also included aquestion about what to call the new degree. Theinitial proposal was “Agricultural Arts” with theexplanation that such a title would “. . . empha-size the artistic, humane and small-scale prac-tice of agriculture.”That premise is full of preconceived notions

about agriculture. It’s pretty clear such a degreeprogram would emphasize ideology versus

exploration, critical thinking and problem solv-ing. That type of ideology is reflective of a pre-sumptuous and narrow view of both agricultureand sustainability. (That’s especially troublingwhen it’s espoused by individuals at institutionsof higher education.)Plus, it overlooks the complexities involved in

studying the issues and advancing solutions.That very point was noted from the Internation-al Journal of Agricultural Sustainability: “Vitalwork needs to be done to establish more pre-cisely what ‘sustainable food’ represents, and toidentify best practice standards across a widerange of activities throughout the [food supplychain].” In other words, as I’ve written previous-ly, sustainability invokes more questions thananswers.With all that in mind, let’s circle back around

to my initial story. Several days after the email,while on vacation, my family and I visited theNew Mexico History Museum. On the bottomfloor, on the wall directly across from the land-ing of the stairs there was the following quota-tion: “The first winter of 1933 was definitely thehardest one. . . Our diet was red beans and corn bread forlunch and supper and watery gravy and biscuitsfor breakfast.”Think about it — not even 80 years ago, U.S.

citizens were facing regular challenges in termsof obtaining balanced diets — not to mentionstruggling with culinary monotony. We’ve comea long ways in such a short period of time.The contrast between then and now is strik-

ing. We’re blessed by incredible abundance andvariety. Without that particular luxury, I doubtwe’d spend much time worrying about, ordevote much effort to, the “artistic practice ofagriculture.”That said, perhaps we should spend more

time remembering about whence we came —after all, those who ignore history are doomedto repeat it.

Dr. Nevil C. Speer is with Western Kentucky University andserves on the board of the National Institute for Animal Agri-culture, a national organization devoted to engaging live-stock producers and livestock health professionals in develop-ing solutions for issues in the livestock industry.

EELLMMWEDNESDAY: Dairy

FRIDAY: Pigs, Goats and Sheep Then Baby CalvesBUTCHER COWSEVERY SALE DAY

MIGUEL A. MACHADO, PresidentOffice: 209/838-7011Mobile 209/595-2014

escalonlivestockmarket@yahoo.com

JOE VIEIRA, RepresentativeMobile 209/531-4156

DUDLEY MEYER, Field Rep.209/768-8568

THOMAS BERT, 209/605-3866

ESCALON LIVESTOCK MARKET, INC.

Call For More

Information On

Consigning Your Stock!

www.escalonlivestockmarket.com

ESCALONHWY 120

HWY 99

SALEHEADQUARTERS

STOCKTONHWY 4

TOSACRAMENTO

FARM

ING

TON

MANTECA

SALE SITE

TO FRESNO

MODESTO

OAKDALE

VALLEY HOME

J17 MARIPOSA RD

Facility located at: ESCALON LIVESTOCK MARKET, INC.25525 E. LONE TREE RD., ESCALON, CA 95320

~ Consignments Welcome ~

N

SPECIAL FEEDER CATTLE SALE MONDAY, AUGUST 6, 2012

Hard to define, easy to taste

Pleasing consumers key to premium beef, audit says

History holds sustainability lesson

Page 8 Livestock Market Digest July 15, 2012

tries on average cut their carbondioxide emissions 20 percent by2020, compared to 1990 levels.

� The goal after that is to cutemissions by between 80 percentand 95 percent by 2050.

� In May 2010, a study by theEuropean Commission's energydepartment estimated the 20percent cut would cost 48 billioneuros ($66.3 billion) a year.Individual nations’ energy

policies are pushing for furthercuts in emissions, wreaking hav-oc on the economies that oncedominated the continent.

� In the United Kingdom, agenerous system of subsidies forrenewable energy was found tohave cost 10,000 jobs between2009 and 2010 alone, and is esti-mated to raise the energy cost ofvital industries (steel making,ceramics, paper, etc.) by 141percent by 2020.

� Spain’s experience with sub-sidizing renewables has been

painful, with a 2009 study atUniversidad Rey Juan Carlosfinding that the subsidies had ledto a loss of 110,500 jobs.

� Italy’s subsidy system, whichsets the price floor for wind ener-gy at three times the market lev-el, was found to sacrifice 6.9industry jobs for every green jobit created, according to a study atItaly’s Instituto Bruno Leoni.

� Germany’s RenewableEnergy Feed-in Act of 2000requires electric utilities to buyrenewables from all producers atfixed, exorbitant rates and feed itinto the power grid for 20 years,raising rates and underminingindustrial competitiveness.

� Even France, which hasremained relatively immune toenergy problems because of itsenormous nuclear energy capaci-ty, is beginning to move awayfrom that clean energy sourcethat has served it so well.

Source: Rael Jean Isaac, “Europe’s Green Ener-gy Suicide,” Wall Street Journal, June 5, 2012.

asked Kallenbach about cornbeing chopped and fed to cowherds. That is being donealready in dry areas of south-ern Missouri.“That works well — if it is

done quickly,” Kallenbach said.The worst thing is to chop

a load of cornstalks, then letthe forage sit on the feed wag-on overnight. In that time, thedeadly nitrates convert intoeven deadlier nitrites.“If you feed a load of high-

nitrite corn to your cattle inthe morning, by noon you canbe out of the cattle business.The cows put their four feetinto the air,” he added.Nitrites tie up the oxygen-

carrying capacity of bloodhemoglobin. Without oxygen,the cow suffocates. At evenlow levels of nitrate, pregnantcows can lose their calves.Grazing drought-stressed

cornstalks is safer than chop-ping, if managed right. Cows

prefer eating corn leaves first.Usually, leaves have lessnitrate content than stalks.Management - in tens ive

grazing works when a strip of acornfield is fenced off with anelectric wire. When the herdeats all of the leaves, but beforethey start eating nitrate-richcornstalks, the cows are movedto a new grazing paddock.Even after rains come, the

water won’t clear up problemsovernight. It takes the plant atleast five days to convertnitrate to safer levels of aminoacids. If there are no ears ofcorn on the standing stalks,conversion takes longer.When cattle run out of pas-

ture, farmers turn to alterna-tive forages, Kallenbach said.Slow down and make a quicknitrate test to ensure safety ofthe herd. It is so long betweensevere droughts that peopleforget lessons learned in thelast drought.

ic. Over time, Starks built a vet-erinary consulting businessfocusing on stocker and feedlotoperations, and closed the clinicin1997 to consult full time.In 1998, he purchased the live-

stock auction market in Cherokeeand added market managementto his resume. He currently ownsand operates Cherokee Sales Co.,LLC with partner Randy Patter-son, as well as continuing to prac-tice veterinary medicine in hisconsulting business.With the many challenges fac-

ing animal agriculture from a pub-lic far-removed from farm life and

As austerity bites into Euro-pean living standards,sparking revolt at thepolls, “growth” has

become the politician’s mantra.But to be competitive, Europeancountries require a secure, plen-tiful and competitively pricedenergy supply. Unless Europeradically rethinks its obsessionwith carbon dioxide emissionsand the anti-fossil fuel energypolicies that flow from it, growthis likely to remain elusive, saysauthor Rael Jean Isaac in theWall Street Journal.Lawmakers across the conti-

nent would do well to take toheart the conclusion of the Euro-pean Commission EnergyDepartment’s Energy Roadmapfor 2050, which stated franklythat “there is a trade-off betweenclimate change policies and com-petitiveness.”

� European Union law man-dates that the 27 member coun-

FROM THE PHOTO of his hand-tooled cover to the very last story, Lee’s newest book, A Handmade Life, is pure Pitts. In the tradition of Dirt Roads and God’s Country, Lee’s latest will entertain and inspire. Destined to be a classic.

4-BOOK SPECIAL! Choose any four

of Lee’s boks and pay only $49.95.

And that includes Priority Postage!

It all ads up to a potential

saving of over $20!

QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL

Four Book Special $49.95

These Things I Wish $14.95

A Collection of Characters $12.95

Essays from God’s Country $12.95

Back Door People $11.95

People Who Live at the End of Dirt Roads $12.95

Shipping & Handling (Per Item if ordered separately) $3.00

Tax (If California resident only) TOTAL x 8.25%

GRAND TOTAL

Name__________________________________________________________________________________

Mailing Address ________________________________________________________________________

City _________________________________________________ State _________ Zip________________

A Handmade Life $14.95

BOOKS ORDERED SEPARATELY

MAKE CHECKSPAYABLE TO:

LEE PITTS, AND MAIL TO: P.O. BOX 616, MORRO BAY, CALIFORNIA

93443

O R D E R F O R M

The Best of the Bunch

FOR BOOKS ORDERED

SEPARATELY PLEASE PAY $3.00 EACH

FOR POSTAGE AND HANDLING.

ht tp : / /aaa l i ves tock .com/ index .php / lee -p i t t s

For the last three years, theEnvironmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) has justifiednew air quality regulations

— unprecedented in stringencyand cost — on the assumptionthat even trace levels of particu-late matter can cause earlydeath. The EPA’s guiding princi-ple in this effort has been thatthere is no price too high to pre-empt further particulate reduc-tion, says Kathleen HartnettWhite, a senior fellow at theTexas Public Policy Foundation.The EPA has gone so far in

this endeavor as to claim that itsrules will save 230,000 lives by2020. However, such rhetoric isbuilt on implausible assump-tions, biased models, statisticalmanipulations and cherry-pickedstudies.

� The EPA emphasizes thekilling potential of airborne par-ticulate matter, yet physicians andtoxicologists have found little evi-dence of this drastic conclusion.

� The EPA’s zero-toleranceprinciple for health risks compelsit to herculean regulatory ends,including reducing particular mat-ter below levels found in nature.

� Natural background levelsof 1 microgram of fine particu-late matter per cubic meter willlogically become the next target

for the EPA.The EPA’s claimed mandate

places it on a losing path; partic-ulate matter realistically cannotbe reduced below certain ambi-ent levels. Nevertheless, its ruleswill impose enormous cost onthe economy in an ill-advisedeffort to accomplish exactly this.

� Indoor levels of fine particu-lates are far higher than outsidelevels.

� Simple tasks such as clean-ing a closet and cooking exposeindividuals to high levels of par-ticulate matter that cannot bereduced by regulation.

� Nevertheless, the EPA willcontinue to make a show of tar-geting particulates under theguise of fulfilling the directives ofthe Clean Air Act.Interestingly, the national

standard for acceptable particu-late matter concentrationremains at 15 micrograms percubic meter. Were the EPA trulyso convinced of the rightness ofits conclusions, one would thinkit would be quick to revise thisstandard. The fact that it hasn’tsuggests that EPA regulators arewell aware of the fallibility oftheir claims.

Source: Kathleen Hartnett White, “The EPA’sFlawed Zero Tolerance Policy,” Daily Caller,June 4, 2012.

Nitrates continued from page one

Europe’s green energy suicide

The EPA’s flawed zero tolerance policy

The Livestock MarketingAssoc. (LMA) is pleased toannounce Tim Starks asPresident for the 2012-

2014 term. Unlike many pastpresidents, Starks did not growup in thelivestock auction mar-keting business. Starks grew upon a farm and ranch operationnear Cherokee, Okla., where for30 years he was a customer ofthelocal auction markets.After graduating from Oklaho-

ma State University (OSU) witha degree in agricultural econom-ics in 1989, he pursued a degreein veterinary medicine, which he

received from OSU in 1992.Following graduation, Starks

returned home and purchased aveterinary practice next to thelocal livestock market in Chero-kee. He and his wife, Jennifer,began a family and raised twochildren of their own, Garrett andMacy. Over the years, they havebeen foster parents to numerouschildren, and recently adopted aneighteen-month-old boy.Soon after beginning his vet-

erinary practice, Starks was hiredas a veterinarian at the auctionmarket on sale days, while hecontinued to run his private clin-

Tim Starks brings fresh perspective as new president of the LMA the source of the food they con-sume everyday, Starks said, Whatwe need to do now is sell our-selves to the other 98.5 percent ofthe world that doesn’t understandwhat we do.”With his animal health per-

spective, Starks will lead theassociation in its objective to bethe “gold standard” in animalhandling and care. Starks wasinstalled at the 2012 LMAAnnual Meeting held inModesto, in June. He will leadthe following board members in

the coming year: Vice President Dan Harris,

Holton, Kan.; Chairman DavidMacedo, Tulare, Calif.; JerryEtheredge, Linden, Ala.; E.H.Fowler, Sedalia, Mo.; WayneGeistweidt,Fredericksburg,Texas; T. Phil Harvey, Jackson,Ga.; Dwayne Mays, Ogallala,Neb.; Clay Myers, Texhoma,Okla.; Sam Roberts,Columbus,Ohio; Charlie Rogers, Clovis,N.M.; Jim Santomaso, Sterling,Colo.; and Bobby Smith,Fairview,Okla.

July 15, 2012 “America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper” Page 9

The ancient Greeks used todebate what people knowand HOW they know it.Deeply held convictions

have wrestled with science-basedknowledge ever since. And even-tually, economics entered in,usually linked to science, if onlythe qualitative data on what peo-ple do with their perceptions.You may know something

because it is stated by a sourceyou consider reliable, even infal-lible. You could know it becauseyou’re confident of your interpre-tation of the data about it. Oryou might feel the truth of some-thing “in your soul,” as if yourown perceptions are infallible;then you look for bits of scienceto support your beliefs.That range is found every-

where from the ranch to the foodconsumer. Fans of certain “foodphilosophy” writers elevateauthors to authorities becausepersuasive prose rings true forthem. With enough disposableincome, they may even pay morefor food that fits their gastro-nomical belief system.Consumers write the checks

that pay our way in the beefindustry, but you have to wonderhow they know how beef cattleshould be raised.Perceptions can be spot-on,

but they can also be arbitraryand out of touch. Consumersseveral generations removedfrom the farm may think the

scale required to make a living inagriculture is just wrong. Hun-dreds of cattle in a herd ratherthan six or eight? Trying to makea profit? That can’t be good.Some beef producers choose

to cater to the various niche mar-kets these ideas spawn, as anexample of business meetingperception-based opportunity.There’s often less risk in cater-

ing to science-based opportuni-ties. Stories about the beef andproducers are increasinglyimportant in marketing. But justtelling banquet guests a storyabout the beef won’t improve itsflavor unless that beef was select-ed based on meat science toplease consumers.Many consumers “know” all

fat is bad, even though sciencehas discovered there is good fat(beef marbling) and bad fat(generally external and trimmed

off the beef). On the producerside, some focus on genetics thatdeliver the good fat, but otherssee it as a fad or the cattle feed-er’s concern.Because of one brand’s suc-

cess, some consumers form apositive impression of all beeflinked to a breed. Yet sciencesays that ability to please con-sumers has more to do with thespecifications than the breed, orrather that breed can provide allthe attributes and tools requiredto hit those specs.Science may trump percep-

tion, but business must considerboth, along with practicality inlabor costs. Investing too muchin a fad can be a mistake if per-ceptions shift, but always goingwith science can take you downa different road to ruin.Your well-informed percep-

tions must guide your decisions.If science can add 30 pounds ofbeef at the expense of consumersatisfaction, it is worth it? Theindustry may never know what itlost.Is it worth it to follow the

recipe for crossbreeding to cap-ture the scientifically proven(infallible?) 4 percent advantagein commodity beef production?Or can you make up for it withthe simplicity, greater pre-dictability and genetic focusfound in one breed? Ultimately, in the long run,

the consumer will decide.

To:_________________________________

From:_______________________________

You have received a ____ year subscription to the Livestock Market Digest.

SUBSCRIPTION RATES: 1-YEAR $19.95, 2-YEAR $29.95

P.O. Box 7458Albuquerque, NM 87194

505/243-9515Fax 505/998-6236

caren@aaalivestock.comwww.aaalivestock.com

Make it Christmas in July for friends, family and business associates with a . . .

~Gift Certificate ~

The stockholders of Farm Credit of New Mex-ico have casted their ballots and the electionresults are in: Incumbent Allen “Wess” Wellshas been re-elected to the Board of Directors.

Aubrey L. Dunn Jr. and Tyson “Buddy” Achen, Jr.have been elected to serve their first terms on theBoard of Directors. Allen “Wess” Wells has been re-elected to the

Northwest region. Wells is married to Kim andthey have four children. They reside in Moun-tainair, New Mexico. Wells is a graduate of East-ern New Mexico University. He is current Chair-man of the Board, Member and Director of FarmCredit of New Mexico, ACA, and a Director ofFarm Credit Foundations.Wells is owner and operator of a cow/calf, year-

ling ranch at Gran Quivira. He is also owner ofWells Insurance Agency along with wife Kim.Offices are located in Moriarty and Mountainair.Wells is involved with many groups including: NewMexico Cattle Growers’ Association, New MexicoFarm and Livestock Bureau, Estancia Valley Eco-nomic Development Association, Estancia BasinResource Association, the Gran Quivira ChurchBoard, and an Advisor of the Tumbleweed 4-HClub. Past affiliations include Member of the Moun-

tainair Board of Education, the Moriarty RotaryClub, and the Torrance County Fair Board. Aubrey L. Dunn Jr. has been elected to the

Southeast region. He is married to Robin and theyhave three children and one granddaughter. Theyreside in Lincoln County, NM. Dunn is a graduateof Colorado State University. He is currently aMember of Farm Credit of New Mexico, ACA,and a past loan officer with Monte Vista, PCA. Dunn is owner and operator of a 40-section

ranch in southeast New Mexico, and runs a

cow/calf operation. He has been a banker for twen-ty-five years having started his career with Produc-tion Credit Association as a Crop Inspector andthe last ten years as President and CEO of FirstFederal Bank. Dunn has been active in his commu-nities and is presently Vice Chairman of ChavesCounty Soil and Water District and New MexicoCoalition of Conservation Districts, and a Memberof New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association andNew Mexico Farm and Livestock Bureau. Pastaffiliations include Chairman of the Otero CountyFair Board, Board Member of the AlamogordoChamber of Commerce, the Roswell Chamber ofCommerce, the Otero County Economic Develop-ment, a Member of Alamogordo Rotary Club,Roswell Rotary Club, Board Member of the NewMexico Bankers Association and New MexicoSchool of Banking. Tyson “Buddy” Achen, Jr. has been elected to

the Southwest region. He is married to Kathy andthey have three children. They reside in LasCruces, NM. Achen is a graduate of New MexicoState University. He is a Member of Farm Creditof New Mexico, ACA and past Member of FarmCredit Bank of Texas.Achen is owner and operator of a 700-acre

pecan farm. He also owns a hardware businesswhich sells farm equipment. In addition he ownsand rents apartments. Achen is owner of Triple AFarms, AAA Holdings, Sun Valley Inc., AchenEnterprises, and TBC. He is also Treasurer of theWestern Pecan Growers Association; Vice Presi-dent of the New Mexico Pecan Growers; and aBoard Member of Farm Bureau. Wells, Dunn and Achen will serve on the Board

of Directors along with: Gary Good, DavidSalopek, Joe Clavel, Mike Marley, Tom Drake,Ben Haines, and Hilaire Mowduk.

Farm Credit of New Mexico members elect board members

WWW.CRAIGDAILYPRESS.COM

The Moffat County, Colo. Commission will begin explor-ing legal options for a potential lawsuit against the U.S.Department of the Interior.The decision was unanimously approved by commissioners

following a recommendation by the Moffat County LandUse Board to challenge certain federal regulations on wildand scenic river designations, recognition of revised statute2477 roads on federal lands, and a ban on energy explorationin Vermillion Basin.Although the regulations are in the Bureau of Land Man-

agement’s Little Snake Field Office’s recently approvedrecord of decision, a potential lawsuit would be filed againstthe U.S. Department of the Interior and not directly at theBLM’s local office.“I’ve been to all but one of the land use board meetings in

the last seven and a half years, where these issues were thor-oughly vetted,” commissioner Tom Gray said. “I think we’vedone that and followed the appropriate process.”Six members of the land use board attended a recent com-

mission meeting to vent their frustrations about compromisesreached with local BLM officials being ignored at the federallevel. The 1-percent energy exploration exemption in VermillionBasin, which the Department of the Interior later struck downin its decision to ban all drilling, was highlighted as an example.“The BLM was an integral part of all the meetings I

attended and we thought the federal government was havingtheir say so, and everyone was operating in good faith,” landuse board member Dean Gent said. “We don’t have to talkabout what’s going on now, but it’s the (federal government)trying to undo everything the local people did is what itamounts to, and I don’t think we need to sit here and take it.”John Kinkaid, a Moffat County resident and commission

candidate in District 1, cited a recent U.S. Supreme Courtruling in his support of the county taking legal action.The case pertained to an Idaho family that filed suit

against the Environmental Protection Agency, which was try-ing to use a wetlands designation to prohibit the family frombuilding a lake home. The court sided with the family.Dave DeRose, a Moffat County resident and Kinkaid’s

opponent for District 1, also commented on the court case.“This couple that fought the federal government did so as

a principle issue because it certainly wasn’t a financially-wiseissue as I’m sure it almost bankrupted them,” DeRose said.“We may become the couple from Idaho that battles the fed-eral government on this issue and I’m fine with that. I sup-port what these land use board guys are telling you.”Wendy Reynolds, field manager for the BLM’s Little

Snake Field Office, also attended the meeting with colleagueTim Wilson.“I wanted to hear the viewpoint of the land use board and

get a better understanding of how you folks feel, but notdebate any of these issues because that boat has come andgone,” Reynolds said. “I would tell you that what you feel iswhat you believe and you need to do what’s right for you.”

Moffat County, Colo. Commission to seek legal counsel over Department of Interior rules

Perceptions, science and business

Page 10 Livestock Market Digest July 15, 2012

Economic reports show thatjob growth in federal regu-latory agencies has far out-paced the growth of tradi-

tional occupations, says DeroyMurdock, a media fellow withthe Hoover Institution.Crucially, these regulators

propose rules and fees that havea stifling effect on the economyas a whole. Businesses spendenormous time and effort incode compliance efforts, and thecosts of such complianceattempts often preclude addi-tional hiring or investment.

� The ranks of these employ-ees have swelled during the cur-rent administration by 5.5 percentfrom 1,289,000 to 1,360,000.

� While many of these federalemployees do not regulate, perse, 291,676 of them do, up 17percent under Obama.

� Researchers at EngageAmerica have calculated thatfederal red tape has squelched atleast 779,203 potential jobs fromthe economy.

� If these positions werefilled, today’s unemploymentrate would fall from 8.2 percentto 7.7 percent.

� Citing a Small BusinessAdministration study, ClydeWayne Crews of the Competi-tive Enterprise Institute explainsthat complying with these regu-lators cost the U.S. economy$1.75 trillion in 2008.

Notably, not all regulationsare bad, nor are all regulatorsbent solely on the constriction ofthe labor market. Many areimportant for guaranteeing thepublic safety or for checking thegrowth of economic activitieswith significant negative exter-nalities. Yet the rapid growth ofthe power of regulatory agenciesand the rules they produce sug-gest that the regulatory environ-ment is out of control.

� Regulatory officials imposed3,807 new rules in 2011, or 15every federal business day.

� These new regulations filled81,247 mind-numbing pages inlast year’s Federal Register.

� The resulting, incrediblycomplex, legal atmosphere cre-ates victims where they need notoccur: Salt Lake City’s DavisHigh School, for example, wasfined $15,000 for forgetting tounplug a soft drink vendingmachine in its bookstore.Continuing regulations, such

as “Conservation Standards forWine Chillers and MiscellaneousRefrigeration Products” and “Effi-ciency Standards for MicrowaveOvens (Standby and Off Mode),”should be greeted with greaterskepticism. Regulators shouldquestion just how much their 15new rules per day are truly serv-ing the interests of the people.

Source: Deroy Murdock, “Over-Regulation IsPricey,” National Review, June 5, 2012.

by RITA JANE GABBETT, www.meatingplace.com

Supermarket chain giantKroger Co. has urged itspork suppliers to speed uptheir transition away from

using gestation stalls, but alsoreminded its customers that thetransition may take many years.“Over the past few months,

the company has reviewed theopinions of animal welfareexperts and other experts regard-ing the use of gestation crates forpregnant sows and has conclud-ed that there are many ways tohumanely house sows,” the com-pany said in a news release.“Kroger believes that a gestationcrate-free environment is morehumane and that the pork indus-try should work toward gestationcrate-free housing for pregnantsows. The company is encourag-ing its suppliers to accelerate thisalready-occurring transition inthe Kroger supply-chain. Krogeralso wants customers to knowthat this is a transition that maytake many years.”Kroger’s statement follows

those by several foodservice andretail companies in recentmonths urging a transition awayfrom gestation stalls includingMcDonald’s, Burger King, Den-ny’s, Safeway, Tim Horton’s andWendy’s.

HSUS cheers“Kroger’s has taken a very

important step for animal wel-fare in declaring that the porkindustry must find an exit strate-gy for its use of gestation crates,”

said Wayne Pacelle, presidentand CEO of the Humane Socie-ty of the United States. HSUShas been actively leaning on foodservice and retail companies thatpurchase pork to urge their sup-pliers to change their sow hous-ing infrastructure.

Pork industry concernedWhile Kroger did not put a spe-

cific timeline on its request andacknowledged the transition couldtake many years, McDonald’s seta 10-year timeline for sourcing allof its pork from farms that do notuse individual stalls to house preg-nant pigs.

This evoked reactions from theNational Pork Producers Counciland the National Pork Boardover the feasibility and economicviability of changing sow housinginfrastructure over a specific time

period. The groups also repeatedtheir conviction based on peer-reviewed research that gestationsstalls are an acceptable animalhusbandry practice.“We fully support continuing

to explore new and better waysto protect pregnant sows,” saidNPB president Everett Forknerin a statement last week. “Farm-ers are adopting improvementsall the time as they study theirfarms and their animals. Goingbackward, though, will just put ahuge financial burden on smallerpig farmers while doing nothingto improve the health and well-being of our pigs.”

RED ANGUS

angus

Bell KeyAngusDennis Boehlke 208/467-2747

Cell. 208/989-1612

A few ChoiceBulls Availableat PrivateTreaty.

NAMPA, IDAHO SANTA GERTRUDIS

A SOURCE FOR PROVEN SUPERIOR

RED ANGUS GENETICS

14298 N. Atkins Rd., Lodi, CA 95240

209/727-3335

HEREFORD

CLAY SCHUSTER • shuster@gorge.net509/773-6051 Home • 541/980-7464 Cell

GOLDENDALE, WA 99620

Washington’s OldestSource of Herefords

“SINCE 1938”SELLING RANGE BULLS IN VOLUME

(TOP REPLACEMENT HEIFERS)

SCHUSTERHEREFORDS

g•u•i•d•e

To list your herd, call CAREN COWAN at call 505/243-9515, ext. 21 or email caren@aaalivestock.com

Call: 979/245-5100 • Fax 979/244-43835473 FM 457, Bay City, Texas 77414

dwendt@1skyconnect.net

DanWendt

S

S Santa Gertrudis CattlePolled and Horned

HERD ESTABLISHED 1953 S

S

See our ad in the April issue!

Bradley3Ranch Ltd.

M.L. Bradley 806/888-1062Fax: 806/888-1010 • Cell: 940/585-6471

Ranch-Raised ANGUS Bulls for Ranchers Since 1955

Our Next Bull Sale:February 16, 2013

at the Ranch NE of Estelline, TX

www.bradley3ranch.com

����������

R.L. Robbs520/384-3654

4995 Arzberger Rd.Willcox, Arizona 85643

BRANGUS

Arecent GovernmentAccountability Office(GAO) report recom-mends that Congress

take action to alleviate thepain of the recession that isfelt by America’s oldest work-ers. Within the recommenda-tion, the GAO offers severalpolicies to accomplish thisobjective, including subsidiesto employers who hire olderworkers, training programs forolder workers and compensa-tion for older workers whoaccept lower-paying jobs, saysDiana Furchtgott-Roth, asenior fellow at the Manhat-tan Institute.This excessive concern

offers relief to a portion of thepopulation that has felt theleast pain in the recent down-turn. If assistance must beoffered to a specific classifica-tion of workers, it is theyoungest who are most inneed.

� Since 2000 the laborforce participation rates ofworkers age 55 and over havebeen rising steadily, whereasthe labor force participationrates of workers 16 to 24 yearsold and workers 25 to 54 yearsold have been declining.

� The biggest decline inlabor force participation ratescan be observed for workersaged 16 to 24.

� Over the past 10 yearsemployment has increasedamong Americans age 55 andover by 8.9 million.

� At the same time, it has

declined by 3.1 million in the25 to 54 age group, and by313,000 among those aged 20to 24.

� The labor force participa-tion rate of seniors hasincreased by 5.7 percentagepoints from 2002 to 2011, yetdeclined in other age groups.Furthermore, the long-term

prospects of younger workersare far bleaker than those oftheir older counterparts.

� A new paper in AmericanEconomic Journal: Applied Eco-nomics found that graduatingin a recession leads to earn-ings losses that last for 10years after graduation.

� Researchers also foundthat earnings losses aregreater for new entrants to thelabor force than for existingworkers, who might see small-er raises, but who have jobs.

� In addition, recessionslead workers (especiallyyounger workers) to acceptemployment in small firmsthat pay lower salaries.Finally, younger workers

tend to have larger debts andfewer assets than older work-ers. Young homeowners tendto buy their houses during thebuildup to the housing bub-ble, subsequently witnessing abottoming out of their homevalue. Older workers whohave owned their homeslonger were more protectedfrom the bubble.

Source: Diana Furchtgott-Roth, “TheUnemployment Crisis for Younger Work-ers,” Manhattan Institute, May 2012.

The unemploymentcrisis for younger workers

Over-regulation is pricey Kroger urges suppliers to accelerate transition from gestation stalls

McDonald’s set a 10-year timelinefor sourcing all of its pork fromfarms that do not use individualstalls to house pregnant pigs.

July 15, 2012 “America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper” Page 11

How much does the federal government owe?

Equipment

ClassifiedsDigest

POWDER RIVER LIVESTOCK EQUIP MENT.Best prices with delivery available. CONLINSUPPLY CO. INC., Oakdale, CA. 209/847-8977.

SALT CREEK HYDRAULIC CHUTE withscale and Honda hydraulic pump $10,000,530/681-5046.

NEW HOLLAND pull type bale wagons:1033, 104 bales, $5,100; 1034, 104 bales,unloads both ways, $4,400; 1044, 120bales, $3,700; 1063, 160 bales, $10,800;1010, 56 bales, $1,200. Also have self pro-pelled wagons. Delivery available. 785/336-6103, www.roederimp.com.

Auction SchoolsCOME TRAIN WITH THE CHAMPIONS. Jointhe financially rewarding world of auction-eering. World Wide College of Auction -eering. Free catalog. 1-800/423-5242,www.worldwidecollegeofauctioneering.com.

BE AN AUCTIONEER – Missouri AuctionSchool, world’s largest since 1905. FreeCD and catalog. Call toll-free 1-800/835-1955, ext. 5. www.auctionschool.com.

LEARN AUCTIONEERING for the 2000s!Nashville Auction School “Free Catalog”800/543-7061, learntoauction.com, 112W. Lauderdale St., Tullahoma, TN 37388.

Rodent Control

BLACK-TAILED PRAIRIEDOG PROBLEMS? Don’t risk having to do itover again with ineffectiveproducts. Rozol Prairie Dog Bait is a restricted-usepesticide approved for useby state certified applicatorson blacktailed prairie dogs

in CO, KS, ND, NE, NM, OK, SD, TX and WY.Made with food-grade winter wheat, a preferredfood source, to ensure quick rodent acceptanceand control. No pre-baiting required. Proven inuniversity trials on over 11,000 burrows to provideover 94% control in a single application. For usein-burrow only. It is the responsibility of the userto read and follow all label directions. Protect yourrange and pastureland from damage with Rozol.

For info call: 888-331-7900 or visit www.rodent-control.com

To place your Digest Classified adhere, contact CAREN COWAN

at caren@aaalivestock.com or byphone at 505/243-9515, ext. 21

www.kaddatzequipment.com • 254/582-3000

KADDATZAuctioneering

and Farm Equipment Sales

New and used tractors, equipment, and parts. Salvage yard, combines, tractors, hay equipment andall types of equipment parts.ORDER PARTS ONLINE.

To place your ad here, call Caren Cowan at 505/243-9515,

ext. 21, or email caren@aaalivestock.com

American Agri-Women connect with policy makers in D.C.

The Annual AAW Sympo-sium: “Sustainable Develop-ment — the Impact onAgriculture” was held at the

National Press Club and coveredissues relating to the Agenda 21impacts on American Agricul-ture. Visits to the RussianEmbassy and Brazil Embassygave members the opportunity toexchange in diplomatic relations.AAW members were provided

briefings on Animal Welfareissues; Immigration legislationand problems facing the cattleindustry. Pulitzer Prize recipient,Gretchen Morgenson, reporterwith the New York Times andauthor of Reckless Abandon-ment was the guest lecturer atthe Allan P. Kirby Center forConstitutional Studies. Her top-ic “Absence of Accountability”

highlighted how “Taxpayers areasked to bail out reckless compa-nies who have not been heldaccountable for their dealings.” Every member took the

opportunity to engage in a livelydiscussion regarding farm childlabor with Department of Laborrepresentatives Melvina Ford,Senior Policy Advisor Wage andHour Division and Nikki McK-inny. Each member present tooka moment to articulate how thefamily farm is a safe, productivelearning environment where chil-dren of family members and oth-ers interested in agriculture canbegin training to ensure a thriv-ing and educated agriculturalworkforce for the next genera-tion. AAW also brought their 2012

policy positions to their Con-

gressional Representatives andSenators on the Hill. The priorityissues included the 2012 FarmBill; Estate Taxation; Immigra-tion Reform and Ag LaborShortages; and Land and WaterConservation Act.Over 200 guests attended the

AAW Congressional Receptionin House Agriculture CommitteeRoom on Wednesday evening.This year’s “Champions of Agri-culture” recognitions were award-ed to Senator Debbie Stabenow,(D-MI) and Representative Cyn-thia Lummis, (R-WY). AAWPresident, Karen Yost said,“These outstanding individualshave dedicated themselves touniting members in congress toensure that legislation supportsthe integrity of American foodand fiber production.”

The Ninth Circuit Court ofAppeals in March affirmedthe constitutionality ofCongress’ removal of

wolves from the federal endan-gered species list. The deadlineto appeal that decision passedquietly this week with no actionfrom plaintiff animal rights andanti-hunting groups.Attorneys representing the

Rocky Mountain Elk Foundationsay the no-action means the casewill not advance to the U.S.Supreme Court, and that the lit-igation has ended in favor of sci-ence-based, state-regulated man-agement and control of wolves.“A lawsuit that began in 2011

in Judge Donald Molloy’s court-room in Missoula, Mont., follow-ing the Congressional delisting,is finally over — and conserva-tion has prevailed,” said David

Allen, RMEF president andCEO. “No appeals paperworkhad been filed by end of the dayon June 12, so the Ninth Cir-cuit’s decision is absolutelyfinal.”Allen said RMEF applauds

the development because it helpsclear the way for continued workto balance wolf populations withother wildlife and human needs.Attorneys representing

RMEF and other conservationgroups in the Ninth Circuit hear-ing had presented oral argu-ments supporting the Congres-sional action, wolf delisting andscience-based, state-regulatedmanagement and control of wolfpopulations.RMEF has pledged to contin-

ue to fight wolf lawsuits and sup-port delisting legislation at bothfederal and state levels.

Deadline Passes for Appealing Ninth Circuit Wolf Ruling, Litigation Ends

Agriculture Secretary TomVilsack has namedLawrence “Larry”Mitchell, the former CEO

of the American Corn Growers’Association, as administrator ofthe Agriculture Department’sGrain Inspection, Packers andStockyards Administration, aUSDA source told The HagstromReport.Mitchell succeeds J. Dudley

Butler, the controversial lawyerwho resigned after the Obamaadministration weakened therewrite of the rule governing thePackers and Stockyards Act.Mitchell has been a political

appointee in the Obama admin-istration as associate director ofthe USDA Office of Advocacyand Outreach.He was deputy administrator

for farm programs at the FarmService Agency from 1997 to

2001 during the Clinton admin-istration. He also served Presi-dent Bill Clinton as legislativeliaison while overseeing theOffice of Public Affairs and theOffice of the Executive Secre-tariat.Mitchell is a fifth-generation

farmer from north Texas, wherehe raised grains, cotton, hay,horses and cattle before startingto work in Washington in 1989.In the private sector, Mitchell

served as president of K StreetResearch as well as CEO of theAmerican Corn Growers’ Associ-ation. Earlier he was vice presi-dent for government relations forthe National Farmers Unionand, as an independent consult-ant and writer on American farmissues, director of federal andstate relations for the AmericanAgriculture Movement and edi-tor of the AAM Reporter.

Larry Mitchell to head GIPSA

The growing governmentdebts of countries acrossthe globe continue to dom-inate headlines. The United

States’ publicly held debt isexpected to exceed 70 percent ofgross domestic product (GDP)this year.

� 2011, the federal govern-ment said it owed $10.2 trillionin public debt, accrued federalemployee pension and otherretirement benefits of $5.8 tril-lion, and other federal liabilitiesof $1.5 trillion, for a total of$17.5 trillion.

� However, Social Securityand Medicare benefits payable tocurrent retirees are not includedas liabilities on federal balancesheets, though these two pro-grams currently account for overone-third of federal spending —approximately $12.8 trillion.

� The public debt plus bene-fits payable to federal workersand the accrued Social Securityand Medicare benefits payableto retirees total $30.3 trillion.The $30.3 trillion, however,

only accounts for accrued bene-fits and does not include the

obligations that are expected toarise in coming years; includingthese obligations results in amuch higher number. Indeed, in2011, a conservative estimate ofthese amounts totaled $84 tril-lion – more than four times whatthe federal government admits itowes ($17.5 trillion).We could try to meet these

obligations by raising taxes. Buthow much of the economy canthe government claim in taxeseach year without adverselyaffecting GDP growth?

� The funding shortfall is 5.7percent of the present value ofall future GDP.

� This implies that in the longrun the federal government willneed to increase taxes from its pre-vious 50-year average of 18 percentof GDP to 24 percent of GDP or atax increase of 30 percent.The growth of the economy will

slow as a result, making it moredifficult to meet the federal gov-ernment’s unfunded obligations.

Source: Liqun Liu, Andrew J. Rettenmaier andThomas R. Saving, “How Much Does the Feder-al Government Owe?” National Center for Poli-cy Analysis, June 13, 2012.

College aid is corporate welfare

Amidst the debate over whether a tempo-rary 3.4 percent interest rate on federalstudent loans passed in 2007 should beretained and, if so, how to pay for it, a far

more important question has been ignored:who really benefits from the $65 billion-plusthat Washington spends each year on studentaid, says Andrew G. Biggs, a resident scholar atthe American Enterprise Institute.Recent economic research suggests that col-

leges siphon off a significant portion of federaleducation aid rather than lowering costs to stu-dents. This is first accomplished by collegesraising institutional tuition in response to theirstudents being eligible for federal assistance.

� As the College Board reports, from 2001through 2011 tuition for public collegesincreased by an average of 5.6 percentagepoints higher than inflation.

� Additionally, private college tuitions rose2.6 percent above inflation over the same period.

� Tuition, housing and other expenses atpublic institutions today tops $21,000 per year,while the figure for private colleges is roughlydouble that.

� In response to rising tuition costs, federalaid such as Pell Grants, work-study programsand tuition tax credits have more than tripledover the last decade, reaching $65 billion in2011.

�Washington also made over $100 billion insubsidized student loans last year.

� Stephanie Riegg Cellini of George Wash-ington University and Claudia Goldin of Har-vard University found a 75 percent differencein tuition between aid-eligible and ineligiblefor-profit colleges.

� This suggests that colleges that are eligiblefor aid respond by raising tuition.Furthermore, there remain numerous other

ways in which colleges can take advantage offederally provided aid that are subtler. Forexample, research shows that colleges respondto aid eligibility by reducing their own aid pro-vided to students.

� Nicholas Turner, a Treasury Departmenteconomist, analyzed colleges’ responses to stu-dent eligibility for tuition tax credits.

� Turner found that roughly four-fifths ofthe benefit students receive from tuition taxcredits is lost through reduced student aid pro-vided by colleges.

� Similarly, Lesley J. Turner, a doctoral candi-date in economics at Columbia University, foundthat institutions managed to capture 16 percentof all Pell Grant aid — and that this figure risesto 79 percent for selective private colleges.

Source: Andrew G. Biggs, “The Truth about College Aid: It’s Corpo-rate Welfare,” The Atlantic, May 21, 2012.

Page 12 Livestock Market Digest July 15, 2012

The farm bill comes up forrenewal every five years,and its specific provisionsdetermine whether major

farm programs administered bythe U.S. Department of Agricul-ture (USDA) will continue.Recently, the Senate passed abill with provisions that will beincluded in the next farm bill.The bill must now go throughthe House, says Veronique deRugy, a senior research fellow atthe Mercatus Center.Looking to the recent history

of farm bills in the UnitedStates, the immediate questionbecomes why they are necessaryat all. In the end, recent farmbills have amounted simply to anenormous amount of spendingon an area that requires littlesupport.

� The USDA distributes farmsupport through major pro-grams, such as commodity pay-ments, crop insurance, market-ing support, farm conservationand agricultural research.

� According to the WhiteHouse budget, the historicaltrend of federal spending(adjusted for inflation) on farmprograms averaged roughly $28billion per year for the 1996 farmbill and $27 billion per year forthe 2002 farm bill.

� The five-year cost of farmprograms in the 1996 farm billwas $141 billion, while the 2002farm bill was $125 billion.

The most recent farm billenacted in 2008, according tothe Congressional ResearchService (CRS), should have beensignificantly smaller than itspredecessors. However, projec-tions underestimated its truecost and the 2008 farm billbecame yet another opportunityfor rent-seeking special intereststo receive unneeded financialsupport.

� When the 2008 farm billwas enacted, the five-year cost(FY2008-2012) of major farmsupport programs was projectedat $83 billion, an average of $16billion per year.

� CRS then updated esti-mates in 2010 to show a higherfive-year cost of $87 billion, anaverage of $17 billion per year.

� The White House budget,however, shows that spendingfor farm subsidies during thismost recent period is closer to$104 billion, an average of $21billion per year.Furthermore, the availability

of these funds creates moreopportunities for special interestgroups and lobbying. In 2010, 10percent of farms received 74 per-cent of all subsidies. Moreover,with farm household incomes 25percent higher than the averageU.S. household income, farmsubsidies amount to corporatewelfare for the relatively well off.

Source: Veronique de Rugy, “The History of FarmBill Spending,” Mercatus Center, June 11, 2012. ST. JOHN’S OFFICE: TRAEGEN KNIGHT

P.O. Box 1980, St. John’s, AZ 85936 || www.headquarterswest.com928/524-3740 • Fax 928/563-7004 • Cell 602/228-3494

info@headquarterswest.com

EASTERN ARIZONA FARMSSt. Johns Irrigation & Ditch Company: #.+�,'83�/9�25)':+*�'6685>/3':+2?�:=53/2+9�458:.�5,�:.+�3'/4�9:8++:���2+<+2'4*�":8++:��/4�":���5.49�':�:.+�/4:+89+):/545,�&':+8�":8++:�'4*��4*�&+9:�":8++:��#.+8+�/9����*++*+*�')8+9�=/:.����9.'8+95,�":���5.49��88/-':/54�'4*��/:).��536'4?��#.+��/::2+��5258'*5�!/<+8�8;49:.85;-.�:.+�6856+8:?�,853�+'9:�:5�=+9:�'6685>/3':+2?����3/2+���'832'4*�/9�/88/�-':+*�</'�,255*�-8'</:?�,25=�*/:).�54�4':/<+�'4*�/3685<+*�6'9:;8+�;:/2/@+*�,582/<+9:5)1�-8'@/4-�� 8/)+������

Lyman Water Company: #.+�,'83�/9�25)':+*�54�:.+�95;:.=+9:�9/*+�5,�":��5.49�'6685>/3':+2?����3/2+�=+9:�5,�$"��/-.='?������#.+�6856+8:?�.'9(++4�,'83+*�/4�'2,'2,'��9;*'4�'4*�5:.+8�<'8/5;9�)8569�/4�:.+�6'9:���'83/4)2;*+9�� ���')8+9�*++*+*�'4*����9.'8+9�5,��?3'4�&':+8��536'4?��#.++4:/8+�6856+8:?�.'9�(++4�)2+'8+*�,58�,'83/4-�'4*�/3685<+3+4:9�/4)2;*+�953+,+4)/4-�'4*�*/8:�/88/-':/54�*/:).+9���88/-':/54�/9�685</*+*�(?�-8'</:?�,25=�*/8:*/:).+9�� 8/)+��� �

St. Johns Irrigation & Ditch Company: #.+�,'83�/9�25)':+*�'6685>/3':+2?:.8++�3/2+9�458:.�5,�:.+�3'/4�9:8++:���2+<+2'4*�":8++:��/4�":���5.49�*/8+):2?�=+9:5,��4*��&+9:�":8++:��#.+8+�/9������*++*+*�')8+9�=/:.����9.'8+9�5,�":���5.49�88/-':/54�'4*��/:).��536'4?�=':+8���'832'4*�/9�/88/-':+*�</'�,255*�-8'</:?�,25=*/:).�54�4':/<+�'4*�/3685<+*�6'9:;8+�;:/2/@+*�,58�2/<+9:5)1�-8'@/4-��#.+�6856+8�:?�/4)2;*+9����3/2+9�5,�,854:'-+�'254-��4*��&+9:�":8++:�� 8/)+������

Nutrioso Farm: �5)':+*�/4�)+4:8'2��6').+��5;4:?���8/@54'��(+:=++4��26/4+'4*�"68/4-+8</22+�'254-�$"��/-.='?���/4�:.+��;:8/595�%'22+?�':�:.+�)54,2;�+4)+�5,��52:+8��8++1�'4*��;:8/595��8++1�=/:.�5<+8����3/2+�5,�3+'4*+8/4-�;:8/595��8++1�8;44/4-�:.85;-.�:.+�6856+8:?���4)2;*+9�5<+8���')8+9�:5:'2�=/:.-8'4*�,':.+8+*�=':+8�8/-.:9�,58������')8+9�5,�/88/-':+*�6'9:;8+���'83'(2+')8+'-+�.'9�(++4�;:/2/@+*�,58�2/<+9:5)1�-8'@/4-�54�/3685<+*�6'9:;8+�'4*�/9�/88/�-':+*�</'�-8'</:?�,25=�*/8:�*/:).+9���+';:/,;2�</+=9�5,��9);*/22'��5;4:'/4�25)':+*/4�:.+�.+'8:�5,�:.+�&./:+��5;4:'/49��#.+8+�'8+�4;3+85;9�.53+�9/:+9�54�:.+6856+8:?�=/:.�+>)+22+4:�'))+99�/4)2;*/4-�5<+8�� �3/2+�5,�6'<+*�,854:'-+�'254-$"��/-.='?�����**/:/54'2�'))+99�/9�685</*+*�(?�)5;4:?�3'/4:'/4+*�85'*9�54(5:.�:.+�458:.�'4*�95;:.�(5;4*'8/+9�� 8/)+�����

CENTRAL ARIZONA RANCHYavapai and Coconino Counties, Arizona, between Camp Verde and ClintsWell. &/4:+8�6'9:;8+�95;:.+'9:�5,��'36�%+8*+�'254-�:.+�%+8*+�!/<+8�(+:=++4����'4*����,++:�+2+<':/54��9;33+8�6'9:;8+�54�:56�5,�:.+��5-52254�!/3'254-��/-.='?9���������4+'8��2/4:9�&+22��(+:=++4�����'4*����,++:�+2+<'�:/54���':/54'2��58+9:��8'@/4-��225:3+4:�,58����'4/3'2�;4/:9��);88+4:�'44;'256+8':/4-�62'4�8;49� ��)'::2+�,58�:.+�=/4:+8�'4*��� �)'::2+�,58�:.+�9;33+8��'9+�6856+8:?�)54:'/49����/88/-':+*�'4*�����8'4-+�*++*+*�')8+9�25)':+*�54�)2'=9�!5'*�+'9:�5,��52(8551���8/@54'�68/3'8/2?�;9+*�'9�/88/-':+*�-8'@/4-�6'9:;8+�,58�=+'4/4-�)'2<+9��";33+8�.+'*7;'8:+89�/4)2;*+9����� "��25-�9/*+*.53+�=/:.�2'8-+�9:5)1�('84�54��')8+9�25)':+*�54+�3/2+�458:.+'9:�5,��2/4:9&+22��0;9:�+'9:�5,��58354��'1+�!5'*��#./9�/9�'�-55*�?+'8�85;4*�8'4).�=/:.�./-.35;4:'/4�9;33+8�)5;4:8?�'4*�3/2*��25=�+2+<':/54�=/4:+8�)5;4:8?��2+99�:.'4�:=5.5;89�*8/<+�:/3+�,853�:.+� .5+4/>�3+:85�'8+'�� '<+*�'))+99�/9�685</*+*�(?�/-.='?9���������:.85;-.�:.+�8'4).��&/4:+8�8'4-+�/4)2;*+9�:.+��++*2+�!5)1)5=�)'36�)54:'/4/4-�'���"��.5;9+��.'?�('84�'4*�)588'29�� 8/)+��������,58�=.52+�8'4).�58��������+>)2;*/4-�:.+�9;33+8�.+'*7;'8:+89�

HEADQUARTERS WEST LTD.

UNDERCONTRACT

TEXAS & OKLA. FARMS & RANCHES

Joe Priest Real Estate1205 N. Hwy 175, Seagoville, TX 75159

972/287-4548 • 214/676-69731-800/671-4548 • Fax 505/998-6236

joepriestre.net • joepriestre@earthlink.com

• 735 acres Paris, Texas, excellent pasture,paved road frontage, huge lake, mansionhome. $2,750,000.

• 274 acres in the shadow of Dallas. Secludedlakes, trees, excellent grass. Hunting & fishing,dream home sites. $3,550/ac. Can add 300more acres, only 30 miles out of Dallas.

• 1,700-acre classic NE TX cattle & huntingranch. $2,750/ac. Some mineral production.

• 256 Acre Texas Jewel – Deep sandy soil, high-rolling hills, scattered good quality trees, & ex-cellent improved grasses. Water line on 2 sidesrd., frontage on 2 sides, fenced into 5 pastures,5 spring fed tanks and lakes, deer, hogs &ducks. Near Tyler & Athens. Price $1,920,000.Make us an offer!

• 146 horse, hunting cattle ranch N. ofClarksville, TX. Red River Co. nice brick home,2 barns, pipe fences, good deer, hogs, ducks,hunting. PRICE REDUCED to $375,000.

• 535 ac. Limestone, Fallas, & Robertson coun-ties, fronts on Hwy. 14 and has rail frontagewater line, to ranch, fenced into 5 pastures, 2sets, cattle pens, loamy soil, good quality trees,hogs, and deer hunting. Priced reduced to$1,750 per ac.

• 10 Wooded Acres with a 6-bedroom, 3.5 bathand a 2-car garage and shop for $185,000,owner financed with 10% cash down.

• 134 acres Wortham, Texas, $1,750/ac. Hunt-ing and cattle. Fronts FM Hwy.

W-RRANCH

18,560 ACRES20 MILES NORTHEAST

OF ROSWELL, N.M.

CHARLES BENNETTUnited Country / Vista Nueva, Inc.575/356-5616www.vista-nueva.com

� 680 Deeded Acres

� 17,900 State Lease Acres

� 927 BLM Acres

� 300 Animal Units Year Long

� Good fences; 4-strand barbwire

� Newly remodeled Southwestern Home

� Good water; windmill and submergible tanks

� $1,800,000

THE LIVESTOCK M ARKET DIGEST

Real Estate GUIDETO PLACE YOUR LISTINGS CONTACT CAREN COWAN

at 505/243-9515, ext. 21 or email caren@aaalivestock.com

The history of Farm Bill spending

On June 12, voters in NorthDakota went to the pollsto decide if they wouldbecome the first state to

abolish its property tax. Thoughthe measure was rejected, that itwas a possibility speaks to theincredible economic opportuni-ties afforded to the state’s resi-dents by its recent oil boom, saysInvestor’s Business Daily.Tapping the enormous

Bakken Shale Formation, oildrillers have enormous extractionopportunities in the state thatare making it one of the leadingoil producers in the country.

� Professor Mark Perryreports that North Dakotapumped another record amountof oil during the month of Marchat a rate of 575,490 barrels perday.

� In so doing, it replaced Cal-ifornia as the nation’s numberthree oil-producing state, behindTexas and Alaska.

� At its current rate of pro-duction growth, North Dakotawill likely top Alaska sometimethis year.

� Continental Resources, anOklahoma-based oil companythat operates 10 percent of thedrilling rigs in North Dakota,estimates there are more than900 billion barrels of oil in place.

� Though only 27 billion to 45billion barrels are actually recov-erable with today’s technology,that’s still a sizable amount thatwill only get bigger as technology

advances.This incredible boom in in-

state production has an unsur-prising effect on the local econo-my: flush with revenues, oilproducers are injecting new lifeinto the job market.

� While the nation’s economylanguishes, North Dakota hasthe nation’s lowest unemploy-ment rate at just over three per-cent.

� Ten North Dakota countiesposted jobless rates at or below2.5 percent in March, andWilliams County boasts the low-est jobless rate in the country atjust 0.7 percent.

� North Dakota oil revenuesgenerated an estimated $839million in fiscal 2011 and areexpected to deliver more than $2billion over the next two years.

� State per-capita income is$4,000 above the national aver-age and, according to the Bureauof Economic Analysis, increasedlast year to $45,747 from$25,952 in 2000.The opportunities available to

North Dakota residents could beexpanded to the entire nation,were the Obama administrationto free up the energy sector.Blocking the Keystone oilpipeline and largely prohibitingdrilling access from federal prop-erties prevent this potential ben-efit.

Source: “North Dakota Drills Its Way Out OfProperty Taxes,” Investor’s Business Daily,June 12, 2012.

North Dakota considers drillingits way out of property taxes

Washington’s Ten Thousand Commandments

Deficits, taxes and spendingare the defining issues ofthe 2012 campaign, butregulation deserves a seat

at the table, too. The current reg-ulatory environment places anenormous burden on the Ameri-can economy by crushing smallbusinesses with nonsensical rulesand making the United States atoxic country in which to locate abusiness, say Ryan Young andWayne Crews of the Competi-tive Enterprise Institute.Of course, efforts have been

made to check this growingproblem. The Obama adminis-tration recently targeted five reg-ulations for elimination that willsave $6 billion over the next fiveyears.However, $1.2 billion per year

is a drop in a bucket compared

to the overall impact of theseregulations.

� According to the SmallBusiness Administration (SBA),the annual cost of complyingwith federal regulations hasexceeded $1 trillion since around2005.

� Last year alone, 3,807 newfinal rules were published in theFederal Register — more than10 per day.

� During that same period,Congress passed only 81 newlaws.

� Furthermore, of the newrules, 212 are classified as “eco-nomically significant,” whichmeans they cost more than $100million per year.These regulations have a

grossly distortionary impact onprivate markets. For example,

their aggregate impact favorslarge businesses over small ones,undermining politicians’ claimsthat they care greatly for theneeds of undersized operations.

� Big businesses with morethan 500 employees pay about$7,755 per employee to complywith federal rules each year,according to the SBA.

� But small businesses withfewer than 20 employees pay$10,585 per employee per year— that’s a built-in competitiveadvantage for big business ofnearly $3,000 per employee.

� Consequently, a recentKauffman Foundation-Thumb-tack.com survey of 6,000 smallbusinesses found that “smallbusinesses care almost twice as

continued on page thirteen

July 15, 2012 “America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper” Page 13

On March 27, the Environ-mental Protection Agency(EPA) proposed what itcalls the first “Clean Air

Act standard for carbon pollu-tion for new power plants.” Theproposal, if enacted, will effec-tively outlaw the construction ofnew coal-fired power plants inthe United States by cappingacceptable carbon dioxide emis-sions at a level below what isattainable by modern plants, saysRobert Bryce, a senior fellow atthe Manhattan Institute.

This proposal will effectivelyeliminate the expansion of coal-fueled electricity domestically.This will not only be enormouslycostly to American electricityconsumers, but is also unlikely toreduce emissions.

� Coal provides about 46 per-cent of domestic electricity, withnatural gas providing about 24percent and nuclear 20 percent.

� The United States hasabout 237 billion tons of coalreserves — about 28 percent ofthe world’s known deposits —and about 241 years of supply atcurrent rates of consumption.

� It is also one of the cheap-

est sources of energy: the EnergyInformation Agency estimatesthat by 2016, coal-fired produc-tion will cost $95 per megawatt-hour compared with $96 foronshore wind, $211 for photo-voltaic generation and $244 foroffshore wind.

� The reduction of such alarge and cheap source of elec-tricity for American consumerswill have substantial impacts.Additionally, though the EPA

is motivated by the goal ofreducing carbon dioxide emis-sions, its policy will target com-panies that are assisting it withequally important objectives. Thenewest coal-fired plants arereducing emissions of sulfurdioxide and nitrogen oxide (oth-

Farms & Ranches

AgrilandsREAL ESTATE

541/473-3100JACK HORTON

www.agrilandsrealestate.com

Bottari RealtyPaul Bottari, Broker • 775/752-3040

www.bottarirealty.com

NEVADA FARMS &RANCH PROPERTY

Farm near Wells, NV:90 acres in hay; 2 homes;

shop and storage three miles from town. $450,000

DAVID P. DEANRanch: 432/426-3779 • Mob.: 432/634-0441

Campo Bonito, LLCR A N C H S A L E S

P.O. Box 1077 • Ft. Davis, Texas 79734

NEED RANCH LEASES & PASTURE FOR 2012 & 2013

New Mexico/ West Texas Ranches

www.availableranches.com

Con A. EnglehornSee details at www.headquarterswest.com || 602/258-1647

Kimble RanchSoutheastern Arizona 40 miles NE of Douglas on U.S. Hwy 80. 9,228 ac deeded, 9,352 ac Arizona State Lease, 747 ac NewMexico State Lease, 4,470 ac U.S. Forest, and 1,356 ac BLM.Estimated carrying capacity 550 AU yearlong. Elevation from 4,100'to 5,800'. Well improved with two building sites and 20 pastureswith permanent water in each. This is an excellent ranch that hasbeen in the same family for three generations. Price $3,800,000.

This ranch is also offered as two units:

� East Ranch – 6,507 ac deeded, 3,255 ac Arizona StateLease, 747 ac New Mexico State Lease, 1,356 ac BLM,and 4,470 ac U.S. Forest, Two building sites. Estimatedcapacity 380 AU yearlong. Price 2,700,000

� West Ranch – 2,721 ac deeded, 6,097 ac AZ State Lease.No buildings. Estimated capacity 170 AU yearlong. Price$1,200,000

HEADQUARTERS WEST LTD.

INTEREST RATES AS LOW AS 3%. PAYMENTS

SCHEDULED ON 25 YEARS

�������������

JOE STUBBLEFIELD & ASSOCIATES13830 Western St., Amarillo, TX • 806/622-3482

Cell 806/674-2062 • joe3@suddenlink.netMichael Perez Assocs

Nara Visa, NM • 575/403-7970

Missouri Land Sales� 675 Ac. Excellent Cattle Ranch, Grass Runway, Land Your OwnPlane: Major Price Reduction. 3-br, 2ba home down 1 mile private land.New 40x42 shop, 40x60 livestock barn, over 450 ac. in grass. (Owner runsover 150 cow/calves, 2 springs, 20 ponds, 2 lakes, consisting of 3.5 and 2ac. Both stocked with fish. Excellent fencing. A must farm to see. MSL#1112191

� NEW LISTING, 327 ACRES: Cattle/horse ranch. Over 225 acres ingrass. 3/4 mile State Hwy. frontage. Live water, 60x80 multi-function barn. 2-bedroom, 1-bath rock home. Priced to sell at $1,620 per acre. MLS #1204641

� 483 Ac., Hunter Mania: Nature at her best. Don’t miss out on this one. Live water (two creeks). 70+ acresopen in bottom hayfields and upland grazing. Lots of timber (marketable and young) for the best hunting andfishing (Table Rock, Taney Como and Bull Shoals Lake) Really cute 3-bd., 1-ba stone home. Secluded yes, buteasy access to Forsyth-Branson, Ozark and Springfield. Property joins National Forest. MLS#1108090

See all my listings at: paulmcgilliard.murney.com

PAUL McGILLIARDCell: 417/839-50961-800/743-0336

MURNEY ASSOC., REALTORSSPRINGFIELD, MO 65804

������������WWW.RANCHLANDCO.COM

�������������� ��Broker in Texas, New Mexico & Oklahoma

430 West Beauregard, Ste. CSan Angelo, Texas 76903

Office: 325/658-8978Mobile: 325/656-8978Mobile: 480/458-6550Fax: 325/658-2400

E: ranches@ranchlandco.com

ALWAYS AVAILABLE TO CHAT!

Ben G. Scott & Krystal M. Nelson, Brokers1301 Front St., Dimmitt, TX 790271-800/933-9698 day/night

� www.scottlandcompany.com� www.texascrp.com

ATTENTION LAND OWNERS: We have sold ranches and other related properties in the Southwestern United States since 1966. We advertise extensively and need your listings (especially larger ranches). See our websites and please give us a call to discuss the listing of your property.

We have a 1031 Buyer for a $2,000,000 to $4,000,000± ranch in Central, Southern or North Texas, Western and Central Oklahoma.

RANCH & FARM REAL ESTATE

SCOTT McNALLY, Qualifying BrokerCell: 575/420-1237Office: 575/622-5867

Roswell, N.M. 88202 • www.ranchesnm.com

Bar MReal Estate

Bar M Real Estate Presents . . .

LK RANCHSmall cattle ranch for sale approximately

40 miles northwest of Roswell, north of State Highway 246 just east of the Lincoln County line.

5,700 total acres to include 960 deeded acres.Grazing capacity set at 164 AU’s. Livestock

and domestic water provided by three wells and a buried pipeline system. New improvements

that consist of a three bedroom residence, maintenance shop along with a feed barn/tackroom combination. One set of working pens. This ranch is ready to go. Price: $985,000

BROKE OFF MOUNTAIN RANCH: 348 head BLM year long permit, two sections deeded, good hunting for mule deer and Audad. Some flat some rough, a little remote, $950,000.

LA PALOMA LAND & CATTLE: Located 10 miles south ofCarlsbad, 437 BLM permit year long approx. 2,170deeded, good working headquarters, only $3,000 a cow.

McCOLLUM RANCH: Located in the south end of theGuadalupe Mountains, 540 acres deeded, 250 headyear long in the Lincoln National Forest lots of grass,$800,000.

I challenge you to find ranches that will pencil like these! Lots of information and pictures online at nmhomeranch.com.

New Mexico Home Ranch RealtyJOE COX, QUALIFYING BROKER, 575/361-5269

130 Cougar Rd., Carlsbad, NM 88220 • Office: 575/981-2427www.nmhomeranch.com • jjcox@pvtn.net

MR.COWMAN!Come to Our Country!WORKING COW andHORSE RANCHES

CUT OVER TIMBER LAND, LAKES and STREAMS

Write or call for free publication:

CASCADE REAL ESTATE10886 Hwy. 62 • Eagle Point, OR 97524

1-800/343-4165E-mail: deuprees@yahoo.com

Place your Real Estate ad in the 2012 FME

(Including the DIGEST 25)

5 0 5 / 2 4 3 - 9 5 1 5 • w w w . a a a l i v e s t o c k . c o m

� Special Real Estate section� Full-color, high-gloss magazine

with internet visibility� Appears on the internet for

12 full months after publication� www.aaalivestock is the

top-ranking website in the Yahoo and MSN search engines

Is there still a case for coal?much about licensing regulationsas they do about tax rates whenrating the business-friendlinessof their state or local govern-ment.”There is now a bill, however,

that would do much to addressthis problem. By requiring Con-gress to vote on all economicallysignificant rules, the Regulationsfrom the Executive in Need ofScrutiny (REINS) Act wouldlighten the regulatory burden. Ithas passed the House, but isstalled in the Senate.

Source: Ryan Young and Wayne Crews, “Wash-ington’s Ten Thousand Commandments,”American Spectator, June 5, 2012.

er gas emissions targeted by theClean Air Act) to levels farbelow those mandated by theEPA.Finally, the new rule will

prove to be completely ineffec-tive at reducing carbon dioxideemissions worldwide.

� As domestic coal usedeclines, U.S. producers are sell-ing more of their product over-seas.

� Between 2010 and 2011,U.S. coal exports increased bymore than 31 percent to about80 million tons, and coal exportsnow account for about 8 percentof all U.S. coal production.

� The ongoing increase inglobal coal consumption willmake any reductions in U.S. coalconsumption and carbon dioxideemissions insignificant.

� Over the last decade, globalcarbon dioxide emissions rose by28.5 percent, despite a reductionin the United States’ emissionsby 1.7 percent over the sameperiod.

Source: Robert Bryce, “Is There Still a Case forCoal?” Manhattan Institute, May 2012.

Page 14 Livestock Market Digest July 15, 2012

by CALLIE GNATKOWSKI-GIBSON

The Beef Quality Assurance(BQA) program, based onindustry and consumerresearch and funded by the

Beef Checkoff, is focused onimproving the efficiency andprofitability of the beef industry. “The program is focused on

trying to improve the quality ofour product and meet consumerexpectations. We teach commonsense approaches to improvingthe quality of beef,” said MannyEncinias, New Mexico StateUniversity. “In my mind, it is thesingle most successful producereducation program across theUnited States.”In New Mexico, BQA train-

ing is conducted by the Cooper-ative Extension Service in coop-eration with the New MexicoLivestock Board (NMLB),which serves as the third-partycertifying agency. The program isopen to anyone involved in beefor dairy cattle production,including ranch hands or dairyworkers who may not own theirown cattle. After attending a training

workshop and passing the writ-ten test given at the end, produc-ers become Beef Quality Assur-ance Trained Producers.Individuals interested becomingBeef Quality Assurance Certi-fied Producers, the next level ofthe program, must also haveestablished and documented avalid Veterinarian/Client /PatientRelationship with their veterinar-ian and sign a BQA CriticalManagement Plan/Affidavit ofCompliance. Typically, this certi-fication goes to ranchers anddairymen who are interested inusing the BQA program as a

marketing tool.Through BQA training,

ranchers learn not only how toimprove their efficiency andprofitability, but also more aboutthe needs and expectations ofconsumers. “BQA is more thanjust giving injections properly,”said John Wenzel, ExtensionVeterinarian with New MexicoState University and the StateCoordinator of New Mexico’sBeef Quality Assurance Pro-gram. “BQA is an attitudetowards management that willinsure the highest quality prod-uct for our consuming public. Itis making sure that all aspects ofbeef production are done in away that we can be proud of.”“Becoming BQA certified

shows that you’re not just arancher out there who has beendoing things the same way forthe past 50 years,” Enciniasagreed. “It shows that you’recontinuing to learn and improve,and are concerned not only withincreasing your profitability, butalso concerned about the endproduct.”“Everyone is responsible for

the welfare of the industry, hecontinued. “I tell people that itdoesn’t matter if they have fivecows or run 5,000 mother cows,they are all part of the produc-tion chain.” Teaching producers to change

the location of intramuscularinjections to the neck, thereforereducing injection-site lesions invaluable cuts of meat, was anearly success of the nationalBQA program. Through theBQA’s educational effort, pro-ducers learned that both carcassyield and consumer acceptabilityof beef products were beingimpacted. “We improved thequality of our product and areable to manage our cattle tominimize or prevent diseasewhen needed,” Encinias said.When you look at industry

data, he said, injection site trau-ma is no longer really an issue.“That in itself is a testimony tohow effective the program hasbeen. Since then, the focus hasmoved to consistency and pro-

viding a better eating experiencefor the consumer.”BQA programs and topics are

developed through research andevaluation of different sectors ofthe industry. New Mexico’s pro-gram incorporates national infor-mation with pertinent state andregional information. “Mostranchers want to do everythingthey can to provide a high quali-ty product,” Wenzel explained.“NM BQA is a verificationprocess that states that a ranchwill follow practices that will helpprovide this high quality prod-uct.”Developed and funded by the

beef industry, the program is freeand voluntary for producers.“One of the great things aboutBQA is that it is completelyindustry-driven,” Encinias point-ed out. “From academics toresearchers to the extension serv-ice to producers, everyone had ahand in making the programwhat it is today.” That industry leadership

could also have long-term bene-fit with regulatory agencies. “Ifwe show that we are policing

The American foundersunderstood that peoplewould have more say overtheir government the closer

it was to them, which is why theUnited States was set up as afederal republic. This can beseen within the Constitution,where the federal government isgiven few powers while state andlocal governments maintainmany, if the people so choose,says Richard Rahn, a senior fel-low at the Cato Institute.This general principle, that

government is better when it iscloser to the people, now faces amovement without precedent inscale: the movement for theglobalization of taxation.

� The United Nations is push-ing a global financial transactionstax “to offset the costs of theenduring economic, financial,

fuel, climate and food crises, andto protect basic human rights.”

� The World Health Organiza-tion, in the name of boostingexpenditures for health researchfor diseases that “disproportionallyaffect the developing world,” hasjust proposed in a new report a“Financial Transactions Tax and aSolidarity Tobacco Contribution.”

� James Hansen of NASAagain recently proposed a “flat-rate global tax” on carbon to stopglobal warming.

� In 2009, then-House Speak-er Nancy Pelosi expressed hersupport for a Group of 20 “glob-al tax” — a sentiment echoed byVice President Biden in March.These tax mechanisms would

divert monies away from nationalpopulations that have rightfullyearned them (both rich andpoor), doling them instead to the

ruling elite of developing nations.Furthermore, there is an

inherent lack of accountabilityfor the internationally governingbureaucrats who would overseesuch taxes. Not only are theyincredibly distant from the peo-ple they are taxing, but theiractions remain a cut above thepurview of national governments.Tax money tends to be much

better spent when the people cansee how it is spent and who isspending it. This is accomplishedmore easily at local levels of gov-ernment, where there can be morereal representation and accounta-bility, rather than at the nationallevel and particularly at the inter-national level, where there is noeffective representation.

Source: Richard Rahn, “Taxation Goes Global,”Washington Times, June 4, 2012.

������������������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������

VIRDENPERMA-BILTLifetime Products

TANK COATINGS,ROOF COATINGS

Available for metal, compositionshingles or tar roofs.

Long lasting and easyto apply.

We also manufacturetank coatings for concrete, rock,

steel, galvanized and mobile tanks.

Call for our free catalog.

VIRDEN PERMA BILT CO.

806/352-2761www.virdenproducts.com

Policies to reduce global warmingmay be doing more harm than goodto public health in both developingand industrialised countries. This is

the conclusion of a new report publishedby the Global Warming Policy Founda-tion.In his report, Dr. Indur Goklany, a

leading expert on human health and cli-mate change, shows that

� Global warming does not currentlyrank among the top public health threats

� The contribution of much-publicized‘Extreme Weather Events’ to global mor-tality is negligible and declining.

� Poverty is a much larger public

health threat than global warming� Present climate policies are already

adding to death and disease� Focused adaptation to climate

change and/or economic developmentwould provide greater health benefits atlower costs than climate mitigation poli-cies.The report warns that exaggerating the

impact of global warming on humanhealth seriously risks misdirecting theworld’s priorities and resources in combat-ing poverty and improving public health.“Climate policies that hinder or slow

down economic development or increasethe price of energy and food threaten to

augment poverty and, as a result, increasenet death and disease,” Dr Goklany said.The increase in biofuel production

between 2004 and 2010, for example, isestimated to have increased the popula-tion in absolute poverty in the developingworld by over 35 million, leading to about200,000 additional deaths in 2010 alone.“Focused adaptation designed to

reduce vulnerability more broadly totoday’s urgent health problems woulddeliver greater reductions in deaths at alower cost than climate mitigation poli-cies,” Dr Goklany added.

For a full copy of the report, go to: http://thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/goklany-public_health.pdf

New Report: Global Warming Policies Might Be Bad For Your Health

Taxation goes global

Producer Education =Consumer Satisfaction

ourselves, agencies could be lesslikely to feel the need to inter-fere,” he noted. Topics, materials and infor-

mation presented at BQA train-ings are constantly changing, soproducers who have attended apast session could benefit from acurrent workshop. “As an indus-try, it is important that we certifyas many producers as possible asBQA certification assures ourconsumers that we care aboutthe product they purchase,”Wenzel said. “I feel it is ourresponsibility as beef producersto do our absolute best, and theNew Mexico Beef QualityAssurance program is one tool inthe toolbox to help accomplishthis goal.”“We know people are busy,

and it’s hard to draw peopleaway from what they need to bedoing,” Encinias noted. “We areworking hard to make our pro-grams and materials fit the needsof those we are trying to reach.”Animal welfare and well

being, including cattle handlingand the judicious use of antibi-otics, is one current focus forBQA training. “We want to makesure that ranchers understandthat how they do things on theranch will impact the ultimateproduct,” Encinias explained.Youth training and education

is another emphasis, in New

Mexico and across the nation.“We want to focus on gettinginformation to kids, and to makesure they understand that theymay just be exhibiting one ani-mal at the State Fair, but theyare part of a larger chain,”Encinias said.On the national level, there is

a big effort to make sure that,especially on large operations,the people who handle the cattlereceives BQA training in addi-tion to owners and managers.Because of the large Spanishspeaking population in someindustry sectors, educationalmaterials in Spanish are nowavailable. “We want to make surethey realize that they’re not justdoing a job, that they’re part of aglobal industry,” Encinias said. In other industries, compa-

nies spend thousands of dollarson private consultants lookingfor the kind of information theBQA program provides to beefproducers at no cost, Enciniaspointed out. “That dollar thatyou pay into the Beef Checkoffat sale time is returned exponen-tially in programs like this. Asbusinessmen and women, wehave stay current. The past gen-eration of beef producers’ effortsto stay involved and engaged iswhat got us to this point, and wewant to pass that on to futuregenerations.”

July 15, 2012 “America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper” Page 15

Medicare and Medicaidfraud have become anextraordinarily lucrativebusiness. Though esti-

mates vary widely on the exactfigures, the opportunities toscam taxpayers are so substantialas to entice everyone fromNigerian mobs to New Yorkcrime families to participate.This is likely due to the sheer

vastness of the sums at stake,says Merrill Matthews, a resi-dent scholar at the Institute forPolicy Innovation.

� Federal authoritiesannounced on May 2 they hadarrested 107 health careproviders in several cities andcharged them with cheatingMedicare out of $452 million.

� Similarly, federal officialscharged 94 people in 2010 withmaking $251 million in phonyclaims.

� When the Medicare FraudStrike Force visited nearly 1,600Miami businesses in 2007 thathad billed Medicare for durableequipment, it found nearly athird of the businesses, 481, didn't even exist, yet they hadbilled Medicare for $237 million.Aggregately, reliable informa-

tion on fraudulent behaviornationwide is scarce, the obviousreason being that much of itgoes unreported.However, various estimates

offered by members of theadministration hint at its enor-mous scale.

� Federal authorities boast ofrecovering $4.1 billion in 2011from fraudulent activity, but spentmillions of dollars to recover it.

� In 2010 the GovernmentAccountability Office (GAO)released a report claiming to haveidentified $48 billion in what ittermed as “improper payments”(nearly 10 percent of the $500billion in outlays for that year).

� Others, including U.S.Attorney General Eric Holder,suggest that there is an estimat-

ed $60 to $90 billion in fraud inMedicare and a similar amountfor Medicaid.To address these issues, feder-

al officials need to adopt policiesthat are better-tailored to pre-venting fraud. To this end, les-sons from private sector insur-ance providers can beinstructive.

� Though it is currentlyattempting to change methods,the Department of Health andHuman Services has for yearsoperated on a “pay and chase”model for stopping fraud.

� Under this system, the

department pays out most claimsand only pursues wrongdoersafter subsequent information isdiscovered.

� Private sector businesses,on the other hand, employ pre-claims adjudication to limitfraudulent claims.This offers a partial explana-

tion for why private insurers losean estimated 1 percent to 1.5percent in fraud compared to anestimated 10 to 15 percent forMedicaid and Medicare.

Source: Merrill Matthews, “Medicare and Med-icaid Fraud Is Costing Taxpayers Billions,”Forbes, May 31, 2012.

The notion that world oilproduction had reached itssummit and would soonbegin a decline — bringing

with it shortages, economic col-lapse, resource wars and generalruination — was in vogue not solong ago.Referred to as “peak oil,” this

momentous point in history hasbeen invoked numerous timesover the past few decades as amark of inevitable civilizationaldecline, says A. Barton Hinkle, acolumnist at the Richmond Times-Dispatch.Reliable media outlets have

lent credence to the belief:according to reports by the BBC,New York Times and HoustonChronicle, we very well should beon the downslope of oil produc-tion right now. However, currentproduction trends and trade pat-terns suggest this is far from thetruth.“Peak oil” and general fears

about the depletion of “recover-able reserves” mislead the publicinsofar as they fail to account forthe role of human ingenuity.That is to say, they ignore theroles of technological advance-ments and market forces inexpanding production optionsand increasing reserves.The contributions of both

technology and economics canbe seen in the current oil boomtaking place in North Dakota:

� The high gasoline prices over

the last decade encouraged pro-ducers to seek out new sources ofoil that were previously prohibi-tively expensive to exploit.

� This provided impetus fordrilling in the Bakken and ThreeForks fields — enormous domesticsupplies that are relatively moreexpensive to take advantage of.

� Moreover, technologicaladvancements in horizontaldrilling and hydraulic fracturingopened the fields up to produc-tion and gave rise to the state’sboom.

� This allowed the state tobecome the number two domesticproducer in only the last six years.Furthermore, this same phe-

nomenon can be seen on a glob-al scale: market pressure andinnovation in production allowfor evermore sources of oil.

� Production has risen strik-ingly fast in places such as thetar sands of Alberta, Canada —a source that was not previouslyviable.

� Oil producers are also seek-ing new deposits in South Amer-ica (Colombia and Brazil), andespecially in the Amazon.

� They are also expanding off-shore discovery ventures, lookingspecifically into a potentiallyhuge field off the northeastshoulder of the South Americancontinent.

Source: A. Barton Hinkle, “Why We’ll Never RunOut of Oil,” Reason Magazine, June 1, 2012.

News With A View &A Whole Lot More . . .

THE most effective advertising medium in ranching today!

To plan your advertising, contact Caren Cowan at:caren@aaalivestock.com or 505/243-9515, ext. 21

On the web at www.nmagriculture.org

Deliver your message NOW in the

Livestock Market Digest!

If you have livestock, a product or service that stockmen and their families need, they will find outabout it quickly if you advertise in the Digest. Digest

readers know value when they see it and they respondrapidly to a good offer.

Before you plan your advertising budget, think hardabout how to stretch your dollars and where they are spentthe most efficiently. Are you paying more to reach fewerqualified potential customers than you would receive in the Digest? The Digest’s circulation is concentrated in themost important livestock producing states: Nebraska,Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Utah, Idaho, California,Oregon, Washington and Texas.

The Digest caters to the most active readers in thelivestock world — who ARE the buyers and sellers oflivestock, the ones who show up and speak up. It is the ONLY place to get Lee Pitts’ perspective on the world and how we are going to thrive into the future.

Medicare and Medicaid fraud is costing taxpayers billions

Why we will never run out of oilStudy: polar bear population ‘Not in crisis’

Climate change doomsayers have for yearsclaimed that declining polar bear popula-tions in the Arctic are a consequence ofmanmade global warming.

But a new study has found that the bearpopulation in part of Canada is larger thanmany scientists thought and might actually begrowing.In 2004, Environment Canada researchers

concluded that the number of bears along thewestern shore of Hudson Bay had dropped 22percent since 1984, to 935 bears, and they esti-mated that by 2011, a continuing decreasewould bring the number down to 610.The Hudson Bay region is considered a bell-

wether for how polar bears are faring elsewherein the Arctic, according to Canadian newspaperThe Globe and Mail.The decrease, the scientists asserted, was

due to warming temperatures that melt icefaster and ruin the bears’ ability to hunt.“That sparked worldwide concern about the

future of the bears and prompted the Canadianand American governments to introduce legisla-

tion to protect them,” The Globe and Mailreported.The World Wildlife Fund even stated in

2008: “If current warming trends continueunabated, scientists believe that polar bears willbe vulnerable to extinction within the next cen-tury.”But a survey released on April 4 by the Gov-

ernment of Nunavut — a federal territory ofCanada — shows that the number of bears isnow 1,013 and could be higher.“The bear population is not in crisis as peo-

ple believed,” said Drikus Gissing, Nunavut’sdirector of wildlife management. “There is nodoom and gloom.”He added that the media in Canada have led

people to believe that polar bears are endan-gered, but “they are not.”He estimated that there are about 25,000

polar bears in Canada’s Arctic region, and“that’s likely the highest [number] there hasever been.”Nunavut, which is the size of Western

Europe, is home to about 32,000 people.

Seth Menefee, Lake Arthur, New Mexico, has beenselected to participate in the 2012 New CenturyFarmer Program July 8 through 14 in Johnston, Iowa.

Menefee is one of 50 outstanding young people represent-ing 24 states who will participate in the program. This exclu-sive, highly competitive program develops young men andwomen committed to pursuing a career in production agricul-ture.Menefee, who attends Oklahoma State University, will

take part in a series of workshops and sessions during theconference. Topics will include the global marketplace, farmfinancing, demographic trends and risk management. He willhear from motivating and informative keynote speakers whowill educate him on the risks and rewards involved with pro-duction agriculture. In addition to classroom learning, stu-dents will experience the latest developments in agriculturaltechnology.The New Century Farmer program is sponsored by Pio-

neer Hi-Bred, a DuPont business; Case IH; CSX Corpora-tion; and Farm Credit; with media partner Successful Farm-ing as a special project of the National FFA Foundation. Theprogram is designed to provide participants with valuableskills and knowledge applicable to their own farming opera-tions. In addition, they will build a network of colleagues thatwill benefit them throughout their careers.

N.M. Student Chosen as a 2012 New Century Farmer

PROGRAM PREPARES YOUNG FARMERS FOR SUCCESS IN 21st CENTURY

Page 16 Livestock Market Digest July 15, 2012

Over the last 20 years, con-vention space in the Unit-ed States has increased by50 percent; since 2005, 44

new convention spaces havebeen planned or constructed inthis country alone. That boomhasn’t come cheap. In the last 10years, spending on conventioncenters has doubled to $2.4 bil-lion annually, much of it frompublic coffers.The resultant glut of conven-

tion centers, has undermined thefinancial strength of thesenotable investments. The annualnumber of conventions is down,as are the number of attendees,and convention centers are strug-gling to meet projected revenues.

� The actual number of con-ventions hosted in the U.S. hasfallen over the last decade.

� Attendance at the 200largest conventions peaked atabout 5 million in the mid-1990sand has fallen steadily since.

� Christopher Leinberger,president of LOCUS empha-sizes that while capturing onlyone percent of the national mar-

ket for conventions would likelybe profitable, 300 cities boughtthat same logic.Consequently, numerous

cities across the country invest inmultimillion-dollar conventionhalls that fail to pay themselvesoff. The experience of Washing-ton, D.C.’s Walter E. Washing-ton Convention Center, whichopened in 2003, demonstratesthis fact.

� The center has won numer-ous awards for its outstandingamenities and grand ambition,with 68 public restrooms, 38escalators and 31 elevators.

� It also has more than 4acres of glass walls, 160 types oflights and 30,293 light bulbs.

� However, the cost of thecenter was still a staggering$833.9 million.

� Between 2006 and 2008, itmissed its booking goals by 13percent, 24 percent and 29 per-cent, respectively, and it runs at aloss of about $22 million a year.

Source: Amanda Erickson, “Is It Time to StopBuilding Convention Centers?” The AtlanticCities, June 11, 2012.

Two decades ago Canada suffered a deeprecession and teetered on the brink of a debtcrisis caused by rising government spending.Since then, the country has undergone a

remarkable recovery, reclaiming financial strengthand harnessing a powerful economic boom. TheUnited States would do well to learn what it canfrom Canada’s experience and adopt its pro-growth policies, says Chris Edwards, director of taxpolicy studies at the Cato Institute.The origins of Canada’s problem lie within an

incredible spending binge that began in the late1960s and lasted for 16 years.

� The Canadian leader during most of thattime, Pierre Trudeau, expanded programs, raisedtaxes, nationalized businesses and imposed barriersto international investment.

� Government spending as a portion of grossdomestic product (GDP) skyrocketed during this peri-od, as did the federal government’s total debt level.

� Canada also suffered from high inflation dur-ing the 1970s and early 1980s.This growing problem was addressed first by a

series of pro-market reforms throughout the 1980sand 1990s, inspired in part by comparable programsinstituted by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.

� In the mid-1980s, the Canadian central bankadopted a goal of price stability, which greatly

reduced inflation and has kept it low and stableever since.

� Following U.S. tax reforms in 1986, Canadaenacted its own income tax cuts under ProgressiveConservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney.

� The government privatized Air Canada in1988, Petro-Canada in 1991 and CanadianNational Railways in 1995.

� Canada privatized about two dozen “crowncorporations” in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

� The other major reform of the late 1980s wasthe free trade agreement with the United States.The market reforms were accompanied by sub-

stantial spending cuts in the late 1990s that finallygot Canada’s fiscal house in order.

� Between 1994 and 1996, the Canadian gov-ernment cut defense, unemployment insurance,transportation, business subsidies, aid to provincialgovernments and many other items.

� As a result, total noninterest spending fell by10 percent.

�With this restraint, federal spending as a shareof GDP plunged from 22 percent in 1995 to 17percent by 2000.

� These spending reforms allowed Canada tobalance its budget every year from 1998 to 2008.

Source: Chris Edwards, “We Can Cut Government: Canada Did,” CatoPolicy Report, May/June 2012.

Reserve Your Advertising Space NOW!

For the 2012 Edition of

Livestock Market Digest’s

FALL MARKETING EDITION

The best read

annual publication

in the livestock industry!

Please contact me

to discuss your

advertising plans!

RON ARCHER505/865-6011archerron@aol.com

Livestock Market Digest

P.O. Box 7458Albuquerque, NM 87194

FEATURING THE . . .

Farm Credit Bank of Texas Reports Solid Earnings & Asset Growth

Farm Credit Bank of Texas(FCBT), a wholesale fund-ing bank, reported anincrease in loan volume

during the first quarter of 2012.The bank’s gross loan portfo-

lio totaled $10.6 billion at March31, 2012, up 3.3 percent sinceDec. 31, 2011. This growth wasattributed primarily to increasesin the bank’s participations loanportfolio, offset by a decrease inthe bank’s direct loans to its affil-iated lending cooperatives.The quality of the loan portfo-

lio also improved, with 93.8 per-cent of total loans classified asacceptable or other assets espe-cially mentioned at March 31,2012, compared with 91.2 per-cent at Dec. 31, 2011. Nonac-crual loan volume decreased13.1 percent during the quarterto $89.2 million at March 31,2012.FCBT net income for the first

three months of 2012 was $34.2million, a decrease of 18.1 per-cent from the same period of2011. The decrease was mainlyattributable to a decrease in netinterest income, due primarily toconcession expenses on debtthat was called and replaced withlower-cost debt, and to anincrease in provision for creditlosses.“Farm Credit Bank of Texas is

pleased to report solid earnings

and growth in our loan portfolioduring this sluggish period forthe financial sector,” said LarryDoyle, FCBT chief executiveofficer.“Although many farmers and

ranchers are still feeling theimpact of last year’s drought aswell as higher operating coststhis year, agriculture remains abright spot in the nation’s econo-my,” added FCBT Board Chair-man Jimmy Dodson. Shareholders’ equity totaled

$1.2 billion at March 31, 2012,an increase of 2.8 percent.Farm Credit Bank of Texas is

owned by 17 rural financingcooperatives in Alabama,Louisiana, Mississippi, NewMexico and Texas, which in turnare owned by their customers —farmers, ranchers, agribusiness-es, country homeowners andother rural landowners.Together, the Austin-based

bank and its affiliated lendersconstitute the Texas Farm Cred-it District, the largest rural lend-ing network in the five-stateregion. Collectively, the districtlenders reported $96.0 million innet income for the first quarterof 2012, a 5.9 percent increaseover the same quarter a year ago.District loan volume increased2.4 percent to $16.0 billion atMarch 31, 2012, from $15.6 bil-lion at year-end 2011.

Unconventional energy meets conventional politics

Cheap natural gas is upend-ing the entire energy out-look. It has scrambled theoutlook for coal-fired ener-

gy — new gas-fired electricity isnow cheaper than coal — morethan any prospective cap andtrade program or punitive Envi-ronmental Protection Agencyregulation could ever do. It alsorenders most renewable sourcessuch as wind and solar even lesscompetitive with fossil fuels, saysSteven Hayward, the F.K. Wey-erhaeuser Fellow at the Ameri-can Enterprise Institute.Meanwhile, the price of natu-

ral gas has fallen so far that theindustry is desperately trying tofigure out how fast it canbecome an export industry to sellit overseas where the marketprice is higher than here. Inshort, natural gas has the poten-tial to become a crucial boomindustry for the United States.A similar story is starting to

unfold with domestic oil. In testi-mony recently by Anu Mittal,the director of natural resourcesand environment for the Govern-ment Accountability Office, sheexplained deposits in the westernU.S. (chiefly oil shale in theRockies) have approximately 3trillion barrels of proven reserves.Public and private analysts

estimate that half of this is recov-erable.This establishes the starting

point of what could be a novel ofAmerica’s energy renaissance.However, this outlook should betaken with a grain of salt: govern-ment regulation and politicalbuckling to environmentalgroups can choke this industryand halt the energy revolutionbefore it begins.

� Most shale oil, unlike shalegas, is located on federal land.

� This offers the currentadministration ample leeway inmandating burdensome permit-ting processes and applications,driving up costs.

� Furthermore, these depositsof shale oil are far from thenation’s refiners — pipelines willhave to be built that can criss-cross the United States to get thisresource where it needs to go.

� This will likely result in alengthy political battle involvingthe environmental lobby, notunlike the one that has causedcostly delays for the Keystone

XL pipeline.If domestic energy in both gas

and oil is to be optimized andour dependence on foreign ener-gy lessened, Washington willhave to get out of the way andallow producers to do what theydo best.

Source: Steven Hayward, “UnconventionalEnergy Meets Conventional Politics: Which WillWin?” Real Clear Markets, May 16, 2012.

We can cut government: Canada did

Is it time to stop building convention centers?

N.M. SRM Black Range Summer Tour

The New Mexico Section ofthe Society for Range Man-agement will be holdingAugust 3 a summer range

tour featuring 100 years of graz-ing and forestry practices in therugged Black Range west ofTruth or Consequences, N.M.The tour (qualifies for 5 SRMCEU credits) will leave at 7:30a.m. from the Black Ranger Dis-trict parking lot (1804 NorthDate Street) and head first toWinston to see a custom-madelog cabin built from timber har-vested off the Black Rangebefore moving on to a grasslandresearch site, a ponderosa pinerestoration site with thinningand burning treatments, and a

long-term riparian grazingresearch site. Local Black Rangepermittees will be on hand todiscuss challenges and opportu-nities with grazing on federallands.Lunch will be provided for

this bring-your-own-transporttour, and there will be an opencookout/social the evening prior.The $40 fee (students $20) sup-ports the section’s NMSU rangescholarships and youth programs(including support for the NewMexico Ranch Camp).For more details and registra-

tion information, please seenmrangelands.org or contactN.M. SRM President Les Owenat lowen@nmda.nmsu.edu